Ratings of Ukrainian Institute of Analysis and Management of Policy (UIAMP)
Ukrainian Institute of Analysis and Management of Policy created the final analysis of 175 Ukrainian political scientists’ and political experts’ quotation in the Internet (including audio-and videoquotation) of 2019.
1. Quantitative review.
Rating of Ukrainian political experts’ media popularity by the results of 2019.
Quantitative review is prepared by the results of monitoring by more than 16.8 billion messages of news of the analytical system “Mediatheka”: news agencies’ publications, the Internet and printed Media, TV messages, radio and Facebook messages by simple calculation of quantity political experts’ mentions.
Quantitative review allows clearly and objectively follow informational trends. Moreover, it doesn’t include filters for informational spam.
Participants in the top 50 ranking can print a certificate of their final place in the review using the links below. For additional questions, contact email@example.com.
The most quoted (quantitatively) Ukrainian experts in 2019 in mass media are Vladimir Fesenko, head of the Center for Applied Political Studies “Penta” (5933 media references). The top 10 following the results of the year also included: Ruslan Bortnik (5651), Denis Kazansky (5306), Oleg Medvedev (5306), Alexey Golobutsky (4138), Yuri Romanenko (3753), Vadim Karasev (3639), Alexey Yakubin (3589), Andrey Zolotarev (3491), Andrey Palchevsky (2770).
Compared with the results of 2018, the top 25 was enterd by: Alexander Kochetkov, Andrey Palchevsky, Mikhail Pogrebinsky, Mikhail Chaplyga, Oleg Medvedev, Sergey Gaidai, Taras Zagorodni. The top 25 was left by: Alexander Paliy, Vitaliy Shabunin, Vladimir Kornilov, Irina Bekeshkina, Oleg Voloshin, Taras Chornovil, Yaroslav Yurchishin.
2. Analytical Review.
Not only exclusive political experts’ quotation is considered in the analytical review. At the same time mentions on personal websites, blogs, forums, advertising were not counted, because they are not marker of Mass Media interest of one or of the other expert and can be used by the participants of rating for subjective increase of the results. This is the main difference between quantitative and analytical review of digital indexes.
According to the results of 2019 (in the analytical review) Vladimir Fesenko, head of the Center for Applied Political Studies “Penta” (980 media references), also became the most quoted political expert in the media. Top 10: Mikhail Pogrebinsky (860), Andrey Zolotarev (818), Ruslan Bortnik (810), Alexey Golobutsky (770), Taras Berezovets (763), Vadim Karasev (762), Alexander Dudchak (740), Victor Nebozhenko (690), Alexey Yakubin (650).
Compared with the results of 2018, the top 25 was enterd by: Andrey Ermolaev, Vyacheslav Kovtun, Denis Kazansky, Karl Volokh, Oleg Soskin, Olesya Yakhno, Sergey Belashko, Taras Zagorodni. The top 25 was left by: Alexander Paliy, Vitaliy Shabunin, Vladimir Kornilov, Dmitry Dzhangirov, Nikolay Spiridonov, Oleg Voloshin, Taras Chornovil, Yaroslav Yurchishin.
The analytical review considers only exclusive quotes from political experts. At the same time, mentions on personal sites and blogs, forums and announcements are not considered, since they are not a marker of media interest in a particular expert, and can be used by rating participants to subjectively overestimate results (“cheat”). This is the reason for the difference in digital indicators between quantitative and qualitative review.
The review doesn’t claim the absolute objectiveness and doesn’t provide any assessment of political scientists or political experts – each of them is a unique professional, and the results of their activity cannot be measured only by quotation in Mass Media.
We will be grateful for suggestions and remarks! Write us firstname.lastname@example.org.
We are open for the cooperation over working together on the review!
Рейтинг не претендует на окончательную истинность или придание оценки политологам или политическим экспертам – каждый из них уникальный профессионал, результаты деятельности которого нельзя измерить только индексом цитирования в СМИ.
Будем благодарны за предложения и замечания на электронный адрес – email@example.com
Сертификаты об итоговом месте в обзоре участники топ-50 рейтинга