How is your policy debate being framed, beyond the mentions count?
Public-affairs work runs on framing, not logo counts. Eidoscore tracks how policy positions are represented in AI answers and discussed in public channels, clusters the narratives, and routes recommended actions through your review.
Why this lands differently here.
Public-affairs work is decided on framing, not volume. Whether a file is described as a safeguard or a burden matters more than how many times it was mentioned, and mention counts cannot tell you which of those two is winning.
Legislative timelines create narrow windows. A consultation opens, positions form, and the vocabulary that takes hold in those weeks tends to survive into the final text. Missing that window is expensive in a way that a missed news cycle is not.
Officials and journalists researching a file increasingly get their orientation from an assistant. If the summary of a policy debate omits your position, or attributes it to someone else, that omission travels into briefing notes.
A policy summary that omits your position gets copied into a briefing note, then into a committee question, then into the record — and the correction always arrives after the vote.
What teams use it for.
Concrete work, not a dashboard tour. Each job produces something a person can review, decide on and send.
Policy-position representation across the major assistants, tracked over time
Narrative clusters across public Telegram and community sources, scored for risk and urgency
A weekly brief your leadership can read in ten minutes, every claim linked to evidence
What we monitor for you.
The same engine, pointed at the signals that matter in your work rather than a generic mention feed.
File-level framing
How a specific piece of legislation or consultation is being characterised, tracked week to week so you can see vocabulary shift as it happens.
Actor comparison
Relative visibility and framing strength across a defined set of stakeholders on the same policy questions.
Coalition signals
Where support and opposition are forming in public discussion, and which arguments are gaining and losing traction.
Evidence trails
Every claim linked to its raw source, so anything in the brief can move straight into an internal briefing note.
A concrete example.
A policy debate you have worked on for a year is now summarised by AI assistants in two paragraphs. Eidoscore shows how your positions are represented across assistants, which sources shape that framing, and how the surrounding public discussion shifts week to week.
Questions we hear from public affairs.
Can we monitor a policy topic rather than a brand?
Yes. Workspaces are topic-led: an issue, a file, a piece of legislation or an organisation.
Can we compare against other actors?
Yes. Define an actor set and the brief reports relative visibility, framing and citation strength.
Can we use the output in internal briefings?
Every claim links back to its raw source, so evidence can go straight into a briefing note.
What the weekly brief contains.
One reviewed document a week. Ten minutes to read, every claim linked back to its source.
EU-hosted. Public sources only. Topics and narratives, not individuals. Every action human-reviewed.