diff --git a/src/routes/school/css/+page.svelte b/src/routes/school/css/+page.svelte index 890bc85..b487fd6 100644 --- a/src/routes/school/css/+page.svelte +++ b/src/routes/school/css/+page.svelte @@ -189,20 +189,13 @@ -
- Sentiment Range Controls & Graph -
+
Full Network Overview
-

- Full Network Overview -

The graph below shows the full diplomatic mention network built from the UN speeches. Each node represents a country, and each directed @@ -277,13 +270,24 @@ -

Interactive graphs
+
+ Explore Country Level Relationships +
-
-
Interactive graphs
+
+
+ To make the network easier to explore in more detail, the website + also includes filtered interactive graphs. Here, users can select a + country and examine both how that country talks about others and how + others talk about that country. Users can also zoom in, zoom out, + and move nodes around to inspect the network more closely. This + makes it easier to compare outgoing and incoming diplomatic + attention, while also showing whether these references are framed + more positively or negatively. +
+
+ + + + +
Main findings
+ + +
+
+
+
+ Our analysis suggests that diplomatic attention in UN speeches is + unevenly distributed across countries. A smaller number of countries + appear much more frequently in international discourse, while many + others are mentioned less often. In the network, countries such as + the United States, China, and Russia stand out as especially visible + actors, which suggests that global political attention is + concentrated around a limited set of highly prominent states. +
+
+ The country level graphs also show that diplomatic attention is + directional rather than balanced. Some countries appear to direct + attention broadly toward many others, while some are more prominent + as targets of discussion. For example, the United States appears as + a country with broad outgoing attention, while China and Russia also + emerge as major targets of incoming attention from other countries. + This shows that centrality in the network can reflect different + roles: a country may be highly active in talking about others, + highly visible as a topic of discussion, or both. +
+
+ Another important pattern is that international political discourse + is not purely positive or purely negative. The sentiment based + graphs suggest that the same country can receive both supportive and + critical references depending on who is speaking and in what + context. This is especially visible for countries like the United + States, China, and Russia, which appear in a mix of positive and + negative relationships rather than fitting into a single simple + category. This highlights the complexity of diplomatic language, + where cooperation, criticism, and strategic concern can exist at the + same time. +
+
+
+ The filtered graphs also make it easier to compare large, globally + central actors with smaller or more selective ones. For example, the + Vatican appears much less densely connected than countries such as + the United States, China, or Russia. This suggests a more selective + pattern of diplomatic attention, where some actors are present in + the network but do not occupy the same broad, central role as major + geopolitical powers. +
+
+ Taken together, these findings suggest that UN speeches reveal more + than isolated political statements. They reflect a larger structure + of global diplomatic attention in which a small number of countries + occupy especially central positions, while others appear in more + limited or specialized ways. By combining mention frequency with + positive and negative framing, the network provides a more nuanced + picture of how countries are represented in international discourse. +
+
+ +
+
+ Example of China’s outgoing vs incoming diplomatic attention +
+ +
+ + + +
+
+
+
+
+
Sources