Pavasović Visković without hesitation: 'It is not justified to expect this from Poljud or the ruins of Maksimir'
The leadership of Hajduk condemned the behavior of part of the fan base before and during the match against Ajax, but some members of the public believe the reaction was too lenient. In an exclusive interview with RTL Danas, Ljubo Pavasović Visković, president of Hajduk's Supervisory Board, stated that Hajduk is neither an educational nor repressive institution and that their responsibility lies solely with the stadium and events occurring there. He emphasized that Hajduk has already apologized to those affected, including fans who were denied the football experience, Ajax, UEFA, and others impacted by the situation. Pavasović Visković claimed that Hajduk did everything necessary at this moment and does not intend to escalate the issue further. When asked if Hajduk fears the Torcida fan group, he said he personally does not fear anyone and believes everyone should follow the law. Regarding the incident itself, he noted that the stadium, built in 1979, is vulnerable to pyrotechnics and other issues, and that Hajduk handed over the stadium to UEFA early Wednesday morning. He argued that expecting someone to prevent such incidents at places like Poljud or the ruins of Maksimir is not
Two members of the Hajduk Split supporters' group Torcida turned themselves in at the Bilica detention center in Split on Tuesday afternoon, according to police confirmation. The individuals identified as Ante Stipetic, known by his nickname Raba and serving as the president of the Torcida Supporters Club, and Denis Sipic arrived at the facility shortly before 5:00 PM. Both men were accompanied by their legal representatives. This surrender brings the total number of detained fans to eight, while thirteen others remain at large. The arrests stem from criminal charges of public incitement to violence and hatred. Police filed reports against twenty-three individuals following a fan march held last Thursday prior to the European Conference League match between Hajduk and Ajax Amsterdam at the Poljud stadium. During the procession, members of Torcida chanted antisemitic and Nazi slogans. Specific chants included calls for the return of Adolf Hitler and references to the Auschwitz concentration camp. One chant referred to Anne Frank using derogatory language. The incident drew widespread condemnation from government officials, political parties, and citizens. An investigating judge at the Split County Court ordered one month of preventive detention for all twenty-three suspects. The judicial decision cited the risk of repeat offenses and the danger of flight, noting that several suspects had been evading authorities. Prior to Stipetic and Sipic's arrival, two other fans had surrendered within the previous twenty-four hours. Earlier this week, Stipe Lekic, a prominent member of the northern stand, and Leonardo Vacak also presented themselves at the Bilica prison. Police continue their search for five remaining suspects who have not yet surrendered. Although initial reports indicated nine men were being sought based on published photographs, the total number of indicted individuals stands at twenty-three. The investigation into the criminal act is ongoing. Former Interior Minister Ranko Ostojic commented on the situation during a television interview. He argued that immediate police intervention during the march would have resulted in serious riots. Ostojic stated that officers chose a better strategy by documenting the event and preparing to arrest the perpetrators later. He praised the head of the Split Police Administration, Marko Srdarevic, for his tactical decisions. Ostojic highlighted that among the twenty-three accused, there are records totaling 424 previous criminal offenses and misdemeanors. He criticized the lack of past sanctions, suggesting this leniency encouraged the current behavior. He also dismissed the idea that police should negotiate with the group, stating that such organizations are not subject to dialogue. Political reactions varied. Ivan Penava, president of the Homeland Movement and vice-president of the Croatian Parliament, held a press conference in Split. He condemned the Nazi chants but simultaneously accused police and media of conducting a witch hunt against Torcida. Political analyst Zarko Puhovski described Penava's arguments as nonsensical and lacking basic understanding of the law. Puhovski suggested that the party was seeking visibility due to poor polling ratings rather than genuinely threatening to leave the governing coalition. Meanwhile, tensions persisted within the detention facility. The Ministry of Justice confirmed that Dutch fans arrested in connection with the same incidents were housed in the same facility as the Croatian detainees. Officials stated that no conflicts occurred during the Dutch fans' stay. They noted that security measures were implemented to prevent clashes, and no specific relocation was deemed necessary based on safety assessments. Separately, a controversial poster appeared in the Varos district of Split. Mimicking a police wanted notice, the poster displayed photos of eleven former ministers and high-ranking officials linked to political scandals. The text read, "Police asks citizens for help," and warned viewers to approach with caution. It listed names including Bozidar Kalmeta, Gabriela Zalac, Vili Berose, and Darko Horvat. The poster emerged after police publicly released the faces of nine men sought in connection with the Torcida incident. The football club Hajduk expects strict disciplinary action from UEFA regarding the match, which was suspended for twelve minutes due to pyrotechnics and smoke. The club expressed relief that the referee did not abandon the game entirely. In subsequent matches, Torcida members displayed banners criticizing the media and government response. One banner claimed that authorities were focusing on minor fan folklore while ignoring major national issues. The group also alleged that police had banned them from displaying certain messages. Sociologist Drazen Lalich, who has studied fan culture, expressed disgust at the events. He stated that he no longer recognizes the group and referenced the late Zoran Ojdanic, a historical figure in Torcida, who would have been horrified by the actions. Lalich noted that while fan violence exists elsewhere, no deaths have occurred in Croatian fan clashes until now. He emphasized that the recent events crossed a boundary, transforming symbolic aggression into extreme hate speech. The case highlights deep divisions in local society. While some view the arrests as long-overdue justice for repeated offenses, others see them as an overreaction. The police maintain that their actions followed standard procedure for identifying fugitives suspected of serious crimes. The investigation continues as authorities work to locate the remaining suspects and gather evidence for potential prosecution.
Go to the primary sources (1)
The official sources this coverage is built on. Read them directly to bypass framing.
Two additional fans of Hajduk football club, who were being sought after following the match between Hajduk and Ajax, surrendered to the police at the Split prison on Tuesday afternoon. According to unofficial information, one of them is Ante Stipetić, the leader of the Torcida fan group. Both men were ordered by the investigator judge of the Split County Court to be placed under investigative detention due to concerns about potential repeat offenses and the risk of fleeing. The police continue to search for three more individuals linked to the incident. In total, 23 people have been reported for inciting violence and hatred in public, and all have been placed under investigative detention. The incident involving the Torcida supporters occurred on Thursday evening before the football match between Hajduk and Ajax at Poljud stadium. Members of Torcida shouted anti-Semitic and Nazi slogans, which were condemned by the state leadership, several parties, notable figures, and citizens.
Bias read (Center): The article reports on a legal process involving fan groups and their actions, which has drawn condemnation from various societal actors including the state leadership and civil society. It presents the facts neutrally, citing the police and judicial authorities without apparent ideological framing.
Why factuality (98): The article provides specific details such as the names of those who surrendered (Ante Stipetić and Denis Šipić), the location (Split police station), and the legal basis for their arrest (investigative detention due to risk of repeat offenses and flight). These align closely with the cross-source c
Why objectivity (96): The article presents the facts in a neutral manner, using direct quotes from the police and avoiding overtly biased language. It reports on the surrender of individuals without taking sides or expressing judgment.
Prime Minister Andrej Plenković commented on the European Union budget, stating Croatia should aim for a surplus of around seven billion euros. He emphasized support for EU enlargement, stressing that candidate countries must meet criteria based on merit. Regarding Montenegro, he conveyed a message urging dialogue with Croatia and noted that other member states understand Croatia's constructive approach. On incidents in Split, Plenković expressed strong dissatisfaction with anti-Semitic chants during a sports event, condemning them sharply and demanding police investigation. He criticized politicians who spread misinformation about the waste situation in Gospić, calling them 'political scavengers.'
Bias read (Center): The article presents statements from Prime Minister Plenković on various political issues, including EU budget discussions, support for enlargement, relations with Montenegro, and condemnation of anti-Semitism in Split. The framing appears balanced, presenting his views without overtly biased phrasе
Why factuality (97): The article accurately reflects Plenković's condemnation of the antisemitic chants in Split, his call for police and judicial action, and his reference to the recent MED9 summit. It also touches on the issue of waste management in Gospić, aligning closely with the primary source document.
Why objectivity (95): The article maintains a neutral tone, presenting the facts and direct quotes from Plenković without editorializing or showing bias.
Prime Minister Andrej Plenković condemned incidents that occurred in Split before a football match between Hajduk and Ajax, particularly messages he deemed antisemitic. He stated he expects the police to investigate who shouted unacceptable slogans and file reports, and for the courts to respond appropriately.
Bias read (Center): The article presents Prime Minister Plenković's condemnation of antisemitic remarks and his expectations for law enforcement and judicial responses. The framing is neutral, focusing on official statements without overtly favoring any side or using biased language.
Why factuality (97): The article accurately reports Plenković's condemnation of antisemitic chants in Split, his call for police and judicial action, and his reference to the recent MED9 summit in Split. It closely follows the primary source document, quoting him verbatim where possible and contextualizing the events pr
Why objectivity (95): The article maintains a neutral tone, presenting facts and direct quotes from Plenković without editorializing. It avoids taking sides but clearly conveys the official stance expressed by the prime minister.
The article discusses the lack of immediate public condemnation by Croatia's three presidents, Zoran Milanović, Goran Jandroković, and Andrej Plenković, in response to Nazi-related chants and antisemitic slogans heard during a football match in Split. These included calls like 'Hitler', 'Auschwitz', and 'Ustasha' by supporters of Hajduk before their game against Ajax. The author criticizes the leaders for not publicly denouncing such behavior immediately, despite having the opportunity to do so through social media. While the government did issue an official statement condemning the chants, it avoided explicitly mentioning antisemitism or the Ustasha movement. The article argues that such incidents require swift and personal responses from leaders to clearly signal intolerance toward fascism and antisemitism.
Bias read (Progressive): The article strongly criticizes the failure of national leaders to respond promptly and personally to fascist and antisemitic rhetoric, implying that their silence reflects a lack of moral leadership. It emphasizes the need for clear, unambiguous condemnation from those in power, suggesting that the
Why factuality (97): The article accurately reports Plenković's strong condemnation of the antisemitic and Nazi-related chants in Split. It includes his statement that he is 'disappointed' and expects the courts to react. This aligns with the primary source document, which details his response and expectations from the
Why objectivity (92): The article maintains a neutral tone, presenting Plenković's statements without overt bias. It avoids emotional language and focuses on factual reporting. However, it slightly emphasizes the negative impact of the incident on Croatia's international image, which could be seen as a minor tilt.
The article reports on two significant victories by Croatian football clubs Dinamo Zagreb and Hajduk Split in European competitions. Dinamo defeated Anderlecht at Maksimir Stadium, while Hajduk beat Ajax 2-1 at Poljud Stadium. These wins have generated excitement among fans, who celebrated enthusiastically on social media with phrases like 'Goalkeeper's magic!' and 'Cap down, warriors!' The results highlight the success of these clubs in continental tournaments.
Bias read (Center): The article focuses solely on sports outcomes and fan reactions, with no mention of political figures, policies, or contentious issues. It provides factual information about match results and fan responses without any apparent bias or framing that suggests a political leaning.
Why factuality (97): The article accurately covers both Dinamo's and Hajduk's victories, providing specific details about the matches and fan reactions. It aligns with the cross-source consensus and includes relevant match statistics and fan comments.
Why objectivity (80): The article has a more emotive tone, especially in quoting fan reactions, which can be seen as less objective. Phrases like 'Golmančina!' ('Goalkeeper's magic!') reflect fan sentiment rather than an impartial assessment.
Hajduk secured a 2-1 home victory against Ajax in the first round of the Conference League, sparking strong reactions in the Netherlands. After the match, Ajax coach Michel Sánchez faced criticism, particularly from former players Frank de Boer and Toby Alderweireld, who questioned his understanding of English football. The defeat has left Ajax fans and figures in disbelief, with some expressing frustration over the team's performance and coaching decisions.
Bias read (Center): The article focuses solely on a sports event and related commentary from athletes and coaches. There is no political framing, bias, or mention of political issues, policies, or officials. The content remains strictly within the realm of sports journalism.
Why factuality (95): The article accurately reports the match results for both Hajduk and Dinamo, providing specific details about the goals scored and the contexts of the victories. It aligns closely with the primary source regarding the significance of the night for Croatian football.
Why objectivity (95): The article maintains a highly neutral and balanced tone, presenting the events without taking sides or using biased language.
Hajduk has apologized for an incident during the second half of their match against Ajax in the first round of the Conference League. The disruption occurred after a large crowd from the northern stand at Poljud Stadium created a smoke 'curtain,' prompting the referee to send the players to the dressing room. The pause lasted longer than expected, causing concern among fans and officials. Hajduk expressed regret for the situation, emphasizing that they do not want Europe to remember them for this incident. The club is likely seeking to address fan behavior and ensure such disruptions do not occur in future matches.
Bias read (Center): The article focuses solely on a sports event and does not involve any political figures, policies, or contentious issues. It provides a straightforward account of the incident and the club's response without apparent bias or framing that favors one side over another.
Why factuality (95): The article accurately represents the official apology from Hajduk regarding the pyrotechnics incident. It aligns precisely with the primary source document's content and tone.
Why objectivity (95): The article maintains an extremely neutral and formal tone throughout, presenting only the club's official statement without any additional commentary or bias.
Hajduk has defeated Ajax 2:1 in a significant European match at Poljud Stadium, marking one of the most memorable nights in the club's recent history. The victory was achieved through strong pressing, tactical discipline, and effective teamwork, with players like Khalil Fayad playing standout roles. Hajduk's approach emphasized controlled play and strategic decision-making rather than reckless attacks. Coach Garcia showed adaptability while maintaining core principles, contributing to the team's success. This win highlights the club's progress and the collective effort of players, staff, and supporters.
Bias read (Center): The article focuses solely on a sports match between two football clubs, discussing tactics, player performance, and coaching strategies. There is no mention of political figures, policies, or contentious issues. The content is purely about athletic competition and does not carry any political bias.
Why factuality (95): The article provides detailed and accurate descriptions of the match, including the pressing strategy, key players like Khalil Fayad, and the coach's comments. It closely follows the primary source document's narrative and includes relevant contextual information.
Why objectivity (90): The article maintains an objective tone throughout, presenting facts without overt bias or emotional language.
Following a shocking and shameful incident involving anti-Semitic chanting and fan abuse after Hajduk's return to the European stage and victory over Ajax, the Israeli Embassy in Zagreb has spoken out. They expressed deep shock at the event and thanked the Croatian government and Sarai Lustig for their response. The embassy emphasized their expectation of decisive action to address such incidents. This comes amid growing concerns over rising anti-Semitism in Croatia, particularly within football culture.
Bias read (Center): The article presents the Israeli Embassy's reaction to an anti-Semitic incident in Croatia, which is a politically sensitive issue. However, the piece remains neutral in tone, simply relaying the embassy's statement without overtly favoring any side. It does not include biased language, one-sided ph
Why factuality (95): The article accurately reports the reaction from the Israeli embassy, including their statement and the response from the Croatian government. All details match the primary source document.
Why objectivity (90): The article remains objective by presenting the statements from both the Israeli embassy and the Croatian government without any biased language or interpretation.
Following a deeply disturbing incident of antisemitic chanting and fan abuse after Hajduk's return to the European stage and their victory over Ajax, the Israeli Embassy in Zagreb has spoken out. They expressed deep shock at the event and thanked the Croatian government and Sarajevo-born Israeli citizen Sari Lustig for their response. The incident sparked widespread condemnation, including from football player Marko Šuta, who admitted he felt ashamed. The situation highlights concerns about antisemitism in Croatian sports culture and the need for greater awareness and education.
Bias read (Center): The article reports on an antisemitic incident involving Croatian football fans and includes reactions from the Israeli Embassy and local figures. It presents multiple perspectives without overtly favoring any side, maintaining a balanced tone.
Why factuality (95): The article accurately reports the reaction from the Israeli embassy and the Croatian government's response. All details are consistent with the primary source document.
Why objectivity (90): The article remains neutral by presenting the statements from the Israeli embassy and the Croatian government without any biased language or interpretation.
Šimun Hrgović, player for Hajduk Split, expressed confidence after their 2:1 victory over Ajax in the Conference League. He stated that Hajduk could win all six of their European matches and secure all 18 points available. The match took place at Poljud Stadium, where Hajduk demonstrated strong performance and secured a significant win against a renowned opponent.
Bias read (Center): The article focuses solely on a sports event and the comments of a player, with no political implications or framing. There is no evidence of biased language, one-sided sourcing, or omission of context related to politics.
Why factuality (95): The article provides a comprehensive overview of the match, including specific details about player performances and the significance of the victory. It aligns very closely with the primary source in terms of content and accuracy.
Why objectivity (90): The article maintains a highly neutral and objective tone, focusing on factual reporting without expressing personal opinions or biases.
Hajduk Split defeated the renowned Dutch club Ajax 2:1 at the Poljud stadium in a significant European match. The victory has sparked reactions in the Netherlands, highlighting Ajax's defeat. Captain Davy Klaassen provided comments after the game, discussing both the atmosphere at the Split stadium and his personal responsibility for events during the match. While many might seek some justification for Ajax's loss in the lively Poljud environment, Klaassen offered a different perspective, emphasizing accountability.
Bias read (Center): The article focuses on a sports event and does not involve political topics, figures, or policies. It provides a neutral account of the match outcome and player comments without any apparent bias or political framing.
Why factuality (95): The article accurately reports the match outcome, key players involved, and quotes from Klaassen. It aligns closely with the primary source document, though it adds some contextual details not explicitly mentioned in the original text.
Why objectivity (90): The article maintains a neutral tone, presenting facts and direct quotes without overt bias. It avoids emotional language and provides balanced coverage of both teams.
The article discusses a football match between Hajduk and Dinamo, highlighting Hajduk's energetic performance and their attempt to dominate the game. Dinamo responded effectively, scoring through a goal by Beljo from a free kick, leading to a victory for Dinamo. The author comments on the outcome, noting that while the result was favorable for Dinamo, there is no need to overemphasize the significance of three points gained.
Bias read (Center): The article focuses solely on a sports event with no political implications or controversy. It provides a straightforward account of the match without any biased language or framing that suggests a particular ideological stance.
Why factuality (95): Accurately reports the match details including scores, players involved, and timeline of events exactly as described in the primary source document.
Why objectivity (90): Completely neutral report focusing solely on the sporting aspects of the match without any political or social commentary.
Dario Melnjak commented on the victory against Ajax and the interruption of the match orchestrated by Torcida. The article discusses Melnjak's reaction to these events, highlighting his opinion on the situation involving Torcida's actions during the game.
Bias read (Center): The article focuses on a sports event and the reactions of a player, without any political commentary or bias. It does not involve political figures, policies, or controversial issues beyond the sports context.
Why factuality (95): The article accurately describes the match events and the pyrotechnics incident. It includes verifiable details about the disruption and its impact on the game.
Why objectivity (90): The article maintains a neutral tone, presenting factual information without taking sides or using emotionally charged language.
The Croatian government has strongly condemned the chanting of Nazi regime slogans by fans during a football match in Split. The incident occurred before today's game between Hajduk and Ajax, where some fans were recorded shouting antisemitic and Nazi-related chants. In response, the police have launched a criminal investigation to identify those responsible and process them further. The government emphasized that such behavior contradicts sportsmanship and democratic values upheld by modern Croatia. This statement was first published by Novi list.
Bias read (Center): The article reports on a government condemnation of a specific event involving chants at a sports event. It presents the official stance and mentions the police investigation without overtly favoring any side. The framing remains neutral, focusing on the facts reported by the government and police.
Why factuality (95): The article accurately reports the government's condemnation of the chants and the ongoing police investigation. All details are consistent with the primary source document.
Why objectivity (90): The article remains objective by presenting the government's official statements without any biased language or interpretation.
Hajduk and Dinamo Zagreb secured important points for Croatia in the UEFA coefficient rankings after their victories in European matches. These results contribute to Croatia's standing in the league, which determines seeding for future European competitions. The article highlights the significance of these wins for national football prestige and competitive positioning.
Bias read (Center): The article focuses solely on sports outcomes and does not engage with political issues, policies, or figures. It provides a straightforward report on the impact of football match results on national rankings.
Why factuality (95): This article accurately reflects the match outcomes and provides detailed information about the rankings and implications for Croatian football. It correctly references the coefficient system used by UEFA and explains the significance of moving up the rankings. All data aligns with the primary sourc
Why objectivity (88): The article maintains a mostly objective tone while explaining the importance of the results. It avoids taking sides but emphasizes the positive impact of the wins on Croatia’s position in European rankings. The language is informative and balanced, though it highlights the benefits of the results w
The article discusses a recent football match between Hajduk and Ajax, where Hajduk won 2:1 at Poljud stadium. It then shifts focus to a Dynamo Zagreb match against Dinamo, which ended in a dramatic last-minute victory for Dynamo after scoring from a penalty in the final seconds of the game. The frustration of Belgian fans is highlighted, particularly their reaction to a player's performance, with some expressing anger over his inability to 'take off his hands,' suggesting dissatisfaction with his play. The match had significant implications for the teams involved, affecting their standings in the competition.
Bias read (Center): The article focuses solely on sports events and does not involve any political figures, policies, or contentious issues. There is no indication of bias in the reporting, as it simply describes the outcomes and reactions to football matches without taking a stance or using biased language.
Why factuality (95): The article accurately summarizes the match outcome and the coach's reaction, aligning with the primary source. It provides precise details about the goals and the overall performance of both teams.
Why objectivity (85): The article remains neutral in tone, presenting the coach's comments without adding personal bias. It focuses on the match results and the coach's reflections without favoring one side.
On a notable evening for Croatian club football, Hajduk and Dinamo celebrated successes in Europe on the same day. This marks the first time such an event has occurred. Both clubs achieved significant milestones in European competitions, highlighting their strong performances. The achievements are considered historic for Croatian football, showcasing the teams' growing influence on the international stage.
Bias read (Center): The article focuses solely on sports achievements without any political commentary or framing. It does not mention political figures, policies, or controversial issues.
Why factuality (95): The article correctly identifies the simultaneous victories of Hajduk and Dinamo, matching the scorelines (2-1 and 1-0) and key moments described in the primary source (Bamba, Klaassen, Šotiček goals). The claim that this was a historic first for Croatian clubs winning on the same day is a verifiabl
Why objectivity (85): While the title uses emotive language ('Prekrasna večer', 'nikad ranije'), the body of the text remains relatively balanced in describing both matches. It acknowledges the difficulty of the games (pressure, VAR penalty) rather than just celebrating the result, maintaining a professional sports journ
A poster featuring photographs of former ministers and other politicians linked to various scandals has appeared in Split. The poster resembles a police wanted notice and includes warnings to 'Approach with caution' and claims that individuals depicted are prone to violence and theft from honest citizens. The poster lists 11 people, including former HDZ ministers and officials involved in corruption cases. It emerged after the Split police publicly released photos of nine men suspected of making Nazi and antisemitic remarks during a Torcida fan march before a football match between Hajduk and Ajax. The police identified 23 suspects in the investigation into incitement to hatred and violence, which sparked public outrage and accusations of targeting fans. The leader of the Homeland Movement, Ivan Penava, criticized the police and media for their actions, while Interior Minister Davor Božinović defended the police's professional conduct. Most of those featured on the poster have been under investigation or convicted for corruption and other offenses.
Bias read (Center): The article presents both perspectives: criticism from Ivan Penava regarding the police and media, and the defense by Interior Minister Davor Božinović. It provides factual information about the individuals on the poster and the context surrounding the police action, without overtly favoring oneside
Why factuality (95): The article accurately reports on the arrest of additional Torcida members and the ongoing investigation. It provides factual updates on the legal proceedings and police actions, aligning with the primary source material.
Why objectivity (80): The article remains largely objective, focusing on the factual progression of the case without injecting strong opinions or emotional language.
President of Croatia, Zoran Milanović, condemned the behavior of part of the Torcida fan group ahead of a football match between Hajduk and Ajax in Split. He described their actions as unacceptable and shameful, emphasizing that chants and gestures openly celebrating Nazi and Ustasha regimes require an urgent and systematic reaction from Croatian police, prosecutors, and ultimately the courts. Milanović called for all relevant institutions to take this matter very seriously to prevent such incidents from recurring. He stated that words of condemnation from the government are no longer sufficient and that measures and sanctions are needed to show that there is no place in Croatia for glorifying Nazism and Ustashism. Fans who love and respect their football club should not be associated with a minority that shames not only Torcida and Hajduk but also Croatia.
Bias read (Center): The article presents the president's direct condemnation of the fan group's behavior without taking a partisan stance. It quotes Milanović's statements and does not include any additional commentary or biased language that would indicate a leaning towards either side of the political spectrum.
Why factuality (95): The article accurately reports Milanović's condemnation of Torcida's behavior and aligns with the primary source. It provides direct quotes from Milanović and does not add any unsubstantiated information.
Why objectivity (80): The article maintains a neutral tone by quoting Milanović directly and avoiding overtly biased language, though it focuses on condemning the behavior without providing counterpoints.
How each side covered it
The same event, grouped by the political lean of the outlets covering it.
progressive
center
conservative
★
How each side covered it
Support independent, bias-aware news and unlock the social pulse, community voting, and every other Supporter feature.
Croatia
