Cross Countries Insights

Lebanese content not only reaches more people but also connects with them more intensely. On average, its Influence Score is several times higher than Tunisia’s, showing that Lebanese media have mastered the art of translating visibility into public impact. This doesn’t just mean higher view counts - it reflects how effectively stories shape conversations and drive reactions.

The variety of Lebanese content is also much broader. There are mainstream outlets, talk shows, and individual influencers all contributing to the mix, which creates high variability in how Influence manifests. Some voices become major opinion drivers overnight. Tunisia’s media, by contrast, cluster tightly around lower levels of Influence. Even when a topic gains attention, it rarely breaks through to widespread debate. The result is a more predictable and restrained media environment.

The two countries differ not only in how far messages travel but also in how deeply they are discussed. Lebanese media tend to produce content with high Salience - topics that feel urgent, emotionally charged, and personally relevant. This drives engagement and keeps the public sphere vibrant, but it also fuels a fast-paced cycle where new controversies constantly replace old ones.

Tunisia, on the other hand, maintains a slower rhythm. Topics are often framed around policy or governance, which reinforces professionalism and credibility but makes the conversation feel distant from people’s daily concerns. The country’s overall Discursiveness - the range and diversity of viewpoints - remains stable but limited. Public dialogue is less polarized, yet also less participatory, as fewer citizens feel compelled to join in.

Each country faces its own risk in the balance between emotion and structure. In Lebanon, influence thrives on confrontation and sentiment, but this comes at the expense of credibility. The emotional storytelling that drives engagement can easily tip into polarization, where competing narratives deepen divisions rather than promote understanding. 

Tunisia’s challenge is the opposite. Its reliance on institutional tone and credibility protects against misinformation but often leads to demobilization, a sense that the media are talking past the public rather than to it. Stories may be factually sound but fail to inspire or provoke action.

Strengthening the health of the public sphere will require tailored approaches for each country. Lebanon could benefit from reinforcing factual accuracy and trust to counter polarization. Tunisia could invest in livelier, emotionally engaging storytelling that still respects professional standards. Both societies reveal that a truly healthy public sphere needs to combine reason and emotion, structure and spontaneity, in a way that keeps citizens both informed and invested.