Tag: Natural Language Processing

Georgia (de)Media Polarization Index: Measuring Political Bias Across Media Outlets

Graphic illustration of media polarization in Georgia, showing two opposing human faces made from crumpled paper representing political bias and dissimilarity in media outlets representing Media Polarization Index.

The Georgia Media Polarization Index, developed by the ISET Policy Institute, is a key tool for measuring political dissimilarity across the country’s leading media outlets. This Index captures the level of polarization in Georgian media by examining the political differences in news coverage. It offers a clear, data-driven approach to understanding media bias.

What the Media Polarization Index Measures

The Media Polarization Index uses a weighted average to measure political dissimilarities between various Georgian media outlets. Ratings determine the weight assigned to each outlet, so higher-rated sources have a greater influence on the results. The Index evaluates how different the political content is across these media platforms. This creates a clear picture of where each media outlet stands in terms of political bias.

The Role of Natural Language Processing (NLP) Models

To build the Index, the ISET Policy Institute uses advanced Natural Language Processing (NLP) techniques. The analysis relies heavily on two models: Word2Vec and Doc2Vec. These models analyze the language in political news articles and extract deeper meanings from the content.

The Doc2Vec model, specifically trained for the Georgian language, plays a central role in this process. It was developed using a large collection of over 250,000 political news articles from diverse media outlets in Georgia. This training allows the model to interpret nuanced meanings in political news. As a result, it provides a highly detailed analysis of media content.

How the Index Measures Dissimilarity

The Doc2Vec model is applied to political news articles from several prominent Georgian media outlets, including Imedi, Mtavari, TV Pirveli, 1TV (Public Broadcaster), Formula, PosTV, and Rustavi2. Using cosine similarity metrics, the model maps the articles into a high-dimensional space. The cosine similarity metric then measures how closely the political content of one outlet aligns with others. A wider angle between vectors, or a smaller cosine similarity, indicates greater political dissimilarity between media outlets.

Clustering Media Outlets Based on Bias

One of the most important insights from the Index is the identification of media clusters. The Index not only measures political dissimilarity across all outlets but also identifies clusters of outlets with similar political biases. The politically biased dissimilarity is calculated by comparing the total dissimilarity with the average dissimilarity within these clusters. This helps the Index identify both the overall level of polarization and the specific biases between different media groups.

Application of the Media Polarization Index

The Georgia Media Polarization Index is an essential tool for analyzing political bias and dissimilarity across Georgian media outlets. It provides critical insights for researchers, policymakers, and media watchdogs who monitor how media bias and polarization evolve over time. The findings from the Index can guide policy decisions, support the push for more balanced media coverage, and encourage constructive dialogue on the media’s role in shaping political discourse in Georgia.

About ISET Policy Institute

ISET Policy Institute is the leading economic policy think tank in Georgia, specializing in research, training, and policy consultation in the South Caucasus region. The institute focuses on promoting good governance and fostering inclusive economic development. For more information, visit ISET Policy Institute.

To read more policy briefs published by the ISET Policy Institute, visit the Institute’s page on the FREE Network’s website.

Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in policy briefs, news posts, and other publications are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the FREE Network and its research institutes.