Archived story4 articles · 4 publishers
FTC seeks contempt against Martin Shkreli over pharma ban
- Published
- Updated
- Reports
- 4 from 4 publishers
The FTC and seven states asked a federal court to hold Martin Shkreli in contempt, alleging he 'flagrantly and repeatedly' violated a lifetime ban from the pharmaceutical industry. The ban stemmed from his role in an illegal scheme to monopolize the drug Daraprim.
AI summary · Original reporting is linked alongside
How the outlets frame it
4 outlets, each read from its own headline and opening- Stands outThe Hill (mildly sensational, some charged words) and ZeroHedge (some charged words).
- PlainestThe Guardian and CNBC.
Tap a logo to see the outlet, the headline it was read from, and where it sits on every measure.
Does the report cast the development as bad news or good news?
All 3 read as neutral.
1 outlet not placed: the reading was split between distant levels.
Does the report play the story up to grab attention?
The Hill stands apart as mildly sensational; the other 3 read as measured.
Do the words judge rather than describe?
Between neutral wording and some charged words; no outlet stands apart.
Does the report give room to one side only?
Only CNBC could be placed, as straight.
3 outlets not placed: the reading was split between distant levels.
All 4 outlets and the headlines they were read from
CNBC
Martin Shkreli violated lifetime pharma industry ban, FTC and states say in contempt claimFraming: Neutral · Sensationalism: Measured · Loaded language: Neutral wording · Slant: Straight
The Guardian
FTC and seven states seek contempt ruling against Shkreli over pharma banFraming: Neutral · Sensationalism: Measured · Loaded language: Neutral wording · Slant: not placed
The Hill
FTC: ‘Pharma bro’ Shkreli violated lifetime industry ban, should be held in contemptFraming: not placed · Sensationalism: Mildly sensational · Loaded language: Some charged words · Slant: not placed
ZeroHedge
FTC Seeks To Hold Martin Shkreli In Contempt For Allegedly Violating Lifetime Pharmaceutical Industry BanFraming: Neutral · Sensationalism: Measured · Loaded language: Some charged words · Slant: not placed
Each outlet is read blind: a classifier sees its headline and opening next to the story's own headline, without the outlet's name, and scores how the report presents the story. A logo sits at the classifier's average reading, so it can fall between two levels. These readings compare coverage of this story only; they are not ratings of the outlets.
Where the outlets diverge
Two headlines from opposite endsSensationalism · Measured → Sensational
The story as a whole
Read from all the reports togetherAffects a specific US group
Single event
No time pressure
Not disputed in the text
Official statement or press release
Attributed to named officials or documents
Not political
No violence reported
Other signals
9 found · 13 not present- Article typeNews report
- TopicCourts and legal
- Government levelMultiple levels
- Where it happensUnited States national
- What a reader getsNew facts
- ToneNeutral and factual
- Viewpoints presentedOne viewpoint only
- Main political actorA government agency
- Public healthA treatment or drug
- Policy areanot present
- Civil liberties questionnot present
- Market relevancenot present
- Which marketunclear
- Market horizonnot present
- Who is economically affectednot present
- Corporate dimensionnot present
- Conflict dimensionnot present
- Conflict direction reportednot present
- Humanitarian impactnot present
- Public safetynot present
- Scientific evidencenot present
- Legal risk in the reportingnot present
The 10 stories everyone is covering, in your inbox at 7 am your time.
grouped.news is free, independent and has no paywall. If it saves you time, chip in.Buy us a coffee ↗