The legitimacy of public broadcasting has been under pressure for several decades. Attempts to repair and restore this legitimacy have led to an intensification of accountability instruments and measures. These instruments and measures tend to focus on consumption figures or cost-benefit analyses, requiring new ways of capturing public value. This article argues that, given the media’s persistent role as an interpreter and multiplier of news via traditional distribution channels and diverse new platforms providing information and opinions, professional follow-up communication is a relevant source for the examination of broadcasters’ contributions to public debate. The essay explores how the analysis of newspapers via computational methods can be used by public broadcasters to reflect on and demonstrate their role in public debates in contributing a diversity of topics and viewpoints.