Extension usage examples:
Here's how our browser extension sees the article:
Article summary:
1. Paweł Kuch, director of the National Centre for Research and Development (NCBiR), was dismissed following a parliamentary investigation into the awarding of 55 million złoty to a 27-year-old company 10 days after its establishment.
2. The company had only one person running it and was registered in a private residence. It received the lowest possible score (10 out of 16 points) but still received funding for its project “IOT Solutions for Tracking Goods in Supply Chains and Monitoring Their Transport Parameters”.
3. Members of Parliament are now calling for the contest to be invalidated due to low credibility and innovation, as well as another project receiving 123 million złoty despite having 132 złoty in revenue in 2020 and no activity since then.
Article analysis:
The article is generally reliable, providing accurate information about the dismissal of Paweł Kuch from NCBiR following an investigation into the awarding of 55 million złoty to a 27-year-old company 10 days after its establishment. The article provides details on how the company received the lowest possible score (10 out of 16 points) but still received funding for its project “IOT Solutions for Tracking Goods in Supply Chains and Monitoring Their Transport Parameters”, as well as how members of Parliament are now calling for the contest to be invalidated due to low credibility and innovation, as well as another project receiving 123 million złoty despite having 132 złoty in revenue in 2020 and no activity since then.
The article does not appear to have any biases or one-sided reporting, as it presents both sides equally with no clear preference towards either side. All claims made are supported by evidence provided within the article itself, such as details on how NCBiR changed rules two days before applications closed and extended application time on the day applications closed due to an “informatics system failure”. There are also no missing points of consideration or counterarguments that could be explored further, nor is there any promotional content or partiality present within the article itself. The article does note potential risks associated with awarding such large sums of money without proper vetting processes being followed, which is commendable.
All in all, this article appears to be trustworthy and reliable with no major issues present that would detract from its overall quality or accuracy.