Social & Web Scraper
Collect relevant Facebook, Instagram, X, YouTube and web content; read available transcripts and image text.
POLLAB PRESENTSPolitical Laboratory · Private presentation
CONNECTED INTELLIGENCE / BY POLLAB
CORTEXSIGNAL
PART OF AZIMUTH
Political intelligence.
Built to look ahead.
Reads the internet. Like a human.
Comments, replies and context are the starting point.
The ambition: better preparation before the next decision.
Scroll to explore ↓
Political strategy team editionResearch · Language · Evidence
The next horizon of political intelligence
Political intelligence.
Built to look ahead.
Political intelligence needs awareness and preparation. Our ambition is to help teams understand today and prepare for what could happen next. Cortex Signal provides the collection foundation; AZIMUTH connects signals, field knowledge, evidence, scenarios and decisions.
Select a layer to see its role ↓
01 / LISTENCortex Signal
Follow scoped sources, posts, comments and replies. Keep the original context and collection gaps visible.
Output: source-linked signals for review.
02 / UNDERSTANDAZIMUTH
Bring signals, documents and field knowledge into issue records. Compare explanations, review evidence and explore scenarios.
Output: a clearer account of what is known, uncertain and worth examining.
03 / FOLLOW THROUGHThe team
People decide. Assign an owner, set a deadline and record the result so the next review starts with context.
Output: accountable work and a record of what was learned.
Harder to surprise. Better prepared to decide.
Preparation before the announcement. Better questions while there is still time to answer them. The wider workspace is on the integration roadmap, with people in control.
One connected research storyCollection foundation → Planned workspace → Human decision
The intelligence mandate
Context is
the advantage.
Cortex Signal follows a conversation the way a researcher would: read the post, follow the replies, interpret the language and keep the context.
01
What is gathering attention?
Trace emerging issues and changes in public discussion.02
What do people actually mean?
Read language, sentiment, irony and the surrounding conversation.03
What can we substantiate?
Keep the source, original wording and analyst judgment together.Designed around the research teamIndependent of party identity
The flagship intelligence layer
CORTEX
SIGNAL AI
Social and web scraping feeds a connected analysis workflow: collect public conversations, interpret the signal and keep the evidence attached.
Facebook + IGPosts / comments / replies
XPublic posts / threads
YouTubeVideos / comments / replies
CORTEXSIGNAL AI
Telugu contextSentiment & stanceLanguage risk
EvidenceDeskSource + context
Analyst review
Comment + sourceReply + contextThread + timeTelugu meaningIssue + stanceReview flagEvidence recordAnalyst review
01 / Public conversation02 / Organize & interpret03 / Specialized analysis04 / Review
Illustrative motion · Proposed connected experience · Collection requires approved access
Cortex Signal / Part of AzimuthCollection → Interpretation → Review
Connected conversation research
It reads the post.
Then the conversation.
Comments. Replies. Conversations. Cortex Signal follows the discussion across Facebook, Instagram, X, YouTube and relevant websites, keeping each response connected to its original post.
01Facebook
Public pages and accessible posts, comments, replies and video discussions.
02Instagram
Public posts, reels, captions, comments and available reply threads.
03
X
Public posts, replies, quoted posts and the surrounding conversation.
04
YouTube
Video metadata, available transcripts, comments and available replies.
05
Relevant web
News, websites, blogs, forums and official documents relevant to the research scope.
Access-aware collection
Social and web scraping, APIs and authorized exports. Configure relevant sources, keywords and watchlists; collection depends on permitted access and content availability. This presentation is an illustrative demonstration.
Social & web scrapingPublic + authorized material
A research instrument for every layer
The scanning
suite.
A proposed set of focused tools, organized around the questions an analyst needs to answer.
Conversation Scanner
Follow comments, nested replies and discussion threads. Read each response with its parent post and surrounding conversation.
Trend Scanner
Track issue growth, repeat mentions and unusual bursts.
Sentiment & Stance
Separate tone from the position taken toward an issue.
Telugu Analyzer
Interpret Telugu script, Romanized Telugu and mixed language.
Language Risk Analyzer
Review profanity, harassment and potentially threatening language.
Public Figure Lens
Organize public mentions of individual politicians by issue.
Evidence & Coverage Scanner
Detect duplicates, missing replies, unavailable content and claims needing review.
Proposed product architectureSeparate analyzers · Shared evidence
Watchlist Scanner / Proposed module
Keep the important
subjects in view.
Scan selected public politicians, issues, keywords and public source accounts for new mentions, comments, replies and changes worth reviewing.
Named public politicians and verified aliases, with ambiguous mentions held for review.
Your watchlists · 0 / 8
Local demo · Saved only in this browser
Illustrative review queue · Select a watchlist
| Watching | New signal | Source context |
|---|---|---|
| Public Figure A | New issue mention | Public X thread |
| Public Figure B | Comment discussion | Facebook post + replies |
| Public Figure C | Statement reference | YouTube transcript |
01 Configure watchlist02 Scan permitted sources03 Review & digest
Proposed output: a source-linked review queue and scheduled digest. Source health, last successful collection, freshness and coverage gaps stay beside each finding. Examples are synthetic; this presentation performs no live scanning.
Selected public subjects and sourcesIllustrative interactive demonstration
Trend intelligence
Watch the
conversation move.
Notice when an issue grows, where it begins and whether the replies tell a different story.
A change worth examining
Inspect the source and reply context before drawing a conclusion.
Emergence
Where the issue first appears in the collected material.
Momentum
How attention changes against the selected baseline.
Recurrence
Whether themes return across sources and time windows.
Synthetic demonstrationOnline activity is not representative polling
Sentiment & stance intelligence
Emotion
needs context.
A supportive tone toward one action can sit beside frustration about another. Preserve that distinction.
Proposed analysis separates sentiment, target, issue, stance and confidence. Uncertain language goes to analyst review.
Synthetic comment / analysis example
“Good that the road work started. But why has the drainage issue been ignored?”
Issue 01Road work · Support
Issue 02Drainage · Concern
Overall toneMixed
Analyst reviewCheck the parent post
Proposed standalone analyzerMeaning before a sentiment score
Independent Telugu analyzer
Telugu,
in its own context.
భాషకు సందర్భం ముఖ్యం
Telugu script, Romanized Telugu, English mixing, local expressions and sarcasm need more than a literal translation.
Synthetic language example
“రోడ్డు బాగుంది… వర్షం పడితేనే అసలు సంగతి!”“The road looks good… the real story comes out when it rains!”
Literal reading
An apparently positive statement about the road.
Context to inspect
Possible irony about performance during rain.
Language handling
Script normalization, transliteration and mixed language.
Human calibration
Native language review of dialect, ambiguity and labels.
Proposed specialized moduleIllustrative interpretation · Validation required
Separate language risk analyzer
Distinguish criticism
from abuse.
A dedicated foul language analysis workflow with the speaker, target, context and severity kept visible.
01
Strong criticism
Disagreement, anger and criticism of a public action.
02
Profanity
Offensive wording; context determines its target and use.
03
Directed harassment
Language directed at an individual or a group.
04
Potential threat
Language requiring urgent human assessment.
Flag for review. Retain the evidence.
Quoted speech, satire and counterspeech can be misread. Labels assist human judgment; they do not establish intent, illegality or platform violations.
Telugu + mixed language contextProposed taxonomy · Native language review
Public Figure Lens
One politician.
A fuller public record.
Illustrative dossier
Public
Figure A
Public statements and collected public mentions, organized for source-based research.
| Identity | Public name, role and verified aliases; ambiguous mentions flagged. |
|---|---|
| Issues | Topics linked to public statements, posts and mentions. |
| Reaction | Issue-specific sentiment and stance, with source limitations. |
| Timeline | Statements, events and changes in collected discussion. |
| Evidence | Source links, dates, original wording and review status. |
Compare equivalent sources and time windows. Research public conduct; avoid private-life speculation and sensitive personal profiling.
Individual public politician analysisProposed module · No real person scored here
The wider evidence picture / Planned integration
The feed is
only one part.
A post shows what was said. A document records a decision. A field report may explain the local context. Keep each kind of source identifiable.
Open a source type ↓
01 / RECORDEDDocuments & imports
Bring official records and operator-supplied material into an issue record, with dates, source references and supporting files.
02 / OBSERVEDField reports
Capture what was observed, where and when. Keep direct observation separate from someone else's account.
03 / EXPERIENCEDOperator knowledge
Record the context experienced people contribute, the basis of their account and the questions still needing evidence.
04 / RESTRICTEDConfidential testimony
Keep source identity, confidentiality and access restrictions attached. Sensitive-data routing remains on the roadmap; testimony remains an account to assess.
Independent sources can strengthen confidence. Repetition alone does not prove a claim.
Dates · Locations · Sources · ConfidentialityStructured intake and sensitive-data routing are planned
EvidenceDesk
Every finding
needs a trail.
Keep the original item, reply context, source reference and analyst note attached to the interpretation.
Demonstrated contracts and synthetic review workflows form the foundation. The wider design connects competing claims, contradictions and Red Team, Blue Team and reviewer checks. Evidence, interpretation and unresolved claims stay distinct.
EvidenceDesk / specimenED—001
“Has anyone seen an update on the drainage work?”
- Material
- Synthetic public conversation example
- Source reference
- Original post + reply link
- Captured context
- Timestamp, parent item and collection method
- Machine label
- Information request · Civic infrastructure
- Analyst note
- Check the referenced notice before summarizing
Review pending · No verified conclusion
EvidenceDesk / Prototype foundationIllustrative artifact
Scenario method / Planned engine
Four rooms.
Before the decision.
Explore plausible pressures and responses before events force the question. A and B are roles; neither is tied to a fixed party.
Open each room to understand the question ↓
ROOM 01 / PRESSURE ON AWhat could put A under pressure?
Develop the strongest plausible adverse scenario for A. Make its assumptions, supporting evidence and unknowns explicit.
ROOM 02 / PRESSURE ON BWhat could put B under pressure?
Apply the same scrutiny to B. Explore a competing explanation without treating the preferred account as settled.
ROOM 03 / RESPONSE FROM AHow could A respond?
Examine the strongest response available to A, its constraints and possible consequences. Record what would change the assessment.
ROOM 04 / RESPONSE FROM BHow could B respond?
Examine the strongest response available to B using the same evidence standard. Keep alternatives open for reviewer challenge.
A scenario is not a fact or a prediction. Red Team challenges assumptions; Blue Team develops responses; reviewers check evidence and contradictions.
Explore → Challenge → ReviewPeople decide and approve public communication
A connected research workflow
The daily
intelligence brief.
A proposed team rhythm that turns permitted public material into a concise, reviewable account of what changed.
Set the scope
Select public sources, people, issues and the observation window.
Read the signal
Run trend, sentiment, Telugu and language risk analysis.
Review the context
Inspect source items, uncertain labels and competing interpretations.
Prepare the internal brief
Summarize changes with evidence, limits and open questions for human review.
The team receives
An issue brief · Public figure dossier · Language risk review · Evidence register · Questions for further research
Proposed operating modelInternal workspace · Human approval for public communication
Leadership workspace / Planned integration
Beyond
the meeting.
Bring developments, field observations, open questions and decisions requiring attention into one view. Then keep responsibility and results attached.
Follow an illustrative task: verify a field report ↓
01 / DECISIONWhat needs checking?
A field report conflicts with an official notice. Record the discrepancy and decide which original material needs verification.
02 / RESPONSIBILITYWho owns it, and by when?
Assign the check to a named analyst with a deadline. Keep the scope and the unanswered question visible.
03 / COMPLETIONWhat proves it is done?
Attach the source material and review note. Record whether the discrepancy was resolved or remains an open question.
04 / MEMORYWhat should the team retain?
Preserve the decision, correction and outcome. Revisit earlier scenarios and forecasts against what actually happened.
An illustrative workflow, not a live task manager. The lesson should not disappear into an old chat.
Owner → Deadline → Completion evidence → LearningDecision tracking remains on the roadmap
A clear view of readiness
The foundation.
The next build.
| Component | Current basis | Next step |
|---|---|---|
| Cortex Signal | Demonstrated collection and operating components | Configure connectors, authorised access and source coverage. |
| Watchlist creation | Included · Local demo here | Connect monitoring, source health, review queues and digests. |
| EvidenceDesk | Demonstrated contracts and synthetic review workflows | Integrate source capture, competing claims and analyst review. |
| Wider AZIMUTH workspace | Integration roadmap | Structured field intake, leadership view, scenario engine, decision tracking and sensitive-data routing. |
A focused validation pilot
Agree the source scope. Assemble a reviewed Telugu benchmark. Evaluate retrieval coverage, language labels, source traceability and analyst effort before defining wider deployment.
Collection scope + workflow readinessIllustrative presentation · No live scanning
AZIMUTH + Cortex Signal / Political intelligence
Harder to surprise.
Better prepared to decide.
Cortex Signal brings comments, replies and conversations into view. AZIMUTH is being built to connect those signals with field knowledge, reviewed evidence and decisions that follow through.
CORTEX SIGNALPart of AZIMUTH
Social & web intelligence · Part of Azimuth
Presented byPOLLABPolitical Laboratory
Cortex Signal has demonstrated collection and operating components. The wider AZIMUTH workspace remains on the integration roadmap. This interactive presentation uses illustrative examples and performs no live scanning. AZIMUTH is an internal workspace; people approve public communication.
Presenter: Political Laboratory ↗ · Foundation: Azimuth reference presentation ↗
Private presentationScope · Validate · Build