YouMind
Sign in
Public Opinion Risk Monitor

Public Opinion Risk Monitor

Track sentiment, assess risk, compare rivals

Made by
肥肥猫
Installed by
0
FromYouMind

Showcase

Description

Turn vague monitoring needs involving a company, brand, person, product, event, or industry issue into a clear, actionable public opinion analysis plan. It defines the subjects, monitoring mode, time range, region, and output format; expands core terms, aliases, related entities, and industry risk terms; and lists the planned coverage across news media, social platforms, video platforms, forums and communities, review and complaint sites, official announcements, and regulatory and judicial sources. You confirm the scope before collection begins; if direct execution is authorized, the complete plan and its criteria are still retained. Based on public information, it creates a source-backed materials list with timestamps, platforms, and coverage notes. It distinguishes reposts, promotional content, and verifiable facts, avoiding claims that results from a single platform represent the entire internet. Analysis includes volume trends, sentiment, topic clusters, peak drivers, propagation paths, key communicators, and risk levels, while clearly separating facts, inferences, and recommendations. For competitor monitoring, it supports multidimensional comparisons of product features, service capabilities, advertising, marketing campaigns, user sentiment, and profitability, explaining the basis for each rating and the sources of differences. The results can be organized into a decision-maker-friendly public opinion report with an executive summary, trends and visual maps, risk alerts, response messaging, data sources, and uncovered channels. It can also generate a visual webpage, an executive presentation version, or a recurring monitoring plan as needed.

Related Skills

View all

Competitive Intel Analyst

Start with a broad view to build a persuasive competitor database, then focus the output on the company’s core business and decision-making needs. This elevates competitor research from “case hunting” to a decision basis that can be verified, compared, and acted on. This is not a prompt that merely lists a few competitors and stitches together webpage screenshots, nor one that crams every database detail into a PPT. “Competitive Intel Analyst” is suitable for consumer goods, technology products, software services, healthcare, education, retail, manufacturing, and other industries. It first defines the research scope and builds a multidimensional search framework covering markets, companies, products/services, user value, technology paths, business models, pricing and channels, intellectual property, partners, and evidence sources. It then creates a continuously updateable, deduplicated, traceable competitor database. Finally, based on the company’s core business, intended use cases, and leadership’s decision questions, it selects a small number of highly relevant benchmarks and produces a conclusion-first leadership briefing PPT, opportunity gaps, and an action roadmap. Suitable for: Panoramic scans of new markets or product categories Product planning, technology planning, and annual strategy research Tracking key competitors, patents, suppliers, or partner ecosystems Adding to, cleaning, and updating evidence in existing competitor databases or PPTs Investment, business development, and management decision briefings Condensing large volumes of material into conclusions that leaders can understand and teams can act on Typical deliverables include a complete competitor database, a shortlist of core competitors, a leadership briefing PPT, technology/patent/ecosystem maps (as needed), an opportunity and risk list, 90/180/365-day action roadmaps, and a source index.

L
213k

Multi-Framework Analysis

Turn complex problems into structured, multi-perspective analyses that can be reviewed, verified, and used to support next steps. Whether you are evaluating career choices, business and product decisions, social phenomena, controversial issues, trending topics, innovations, or abstract concepts, this Skill first clarifies the subject, goals, constraints, known information, and key unknowns. It then selects complementary cognitive frameworks based on the task, avoiding a pileup of concepts or repeated versions of the same conclusion. The analysis clearly distinguishes between information provided by the user, verified facts, general principles, assumptions, inferences, and content that still needs validation. It places evidence, mechanisms, counterevidence, alternative explanations, and uncertainty within a clear chain of reasoning. For time-sensitive, controversial, specialized, or high-risk facts, it can use targeted web searches and verify original sources. When sources conflict, it preserves the differences rather than filling gaps with unverified data or overly certain claims. The final output typically includes a problem profile; the framework selection and analysis of each framework; areas of agreement and disagreement across perspectives; sensitive variables; blind spots and failure conditions; and conditional conclusions with confidence levels. It does not replace professional medical, legal, investment, tax, or other advice. Instead, it helps you identify the factors that truly affect judgment and design minimal validation steps, information-gathering plans, decision gates, or reversible next steps. Simple questions can be condensed into a brief assessment, while complex or multi-subject tasks can be developed into a complete analytical report.

P
110k

Research & Implementation

For a specified topic, this Skill produces a focused research report that combines expert judgment with practical execution. It helps beginners understand the problem, compare options, and complete their first hands-on project. The report first defines the research scope, intended audience, and time-sensitivity boundaries. It then reviews mainstream options by cost, barriers to entry, maturity, suitable use cases, and risks, providing a clear, evidence-based recommendation instead of a vague comparison that simply says “each has its pros and cons.” The report also explains the recommended option’s basic principles, capability boundaries, and common pitfalls. For information that may change easily—such as pricing, policies, and versions—it identifies the supporting evidence, validity period, and verification method. When information is insufficient, it clearly points out the gaps rather than making things up. All technical terms are explained in plain language, and key facts are accompanied by verifiable sources or reproducible steps whenever possible. You’ll also receive a beginner-focused, from-scratch implementation guide covering the tools, accounts, budget, and time needed in advance, along with specific actions, decision criteria, and common troubleshooting steps for each stage. After your first hands-on experience, the guide provides 30-day and 90-day progression plans and highlights the steps people are most likely to abandon. It’s suitable for individuals and teams conducting focused research, selecting among options, or putting a plan into practice.

知
21k

Information

Version
v2
Last updated
Runtime credits
Usage-based
Models
Auto

Ready to create something bolder?

Public Opinion Risk Monitor