
Natalia Kiselova
Natalia Kiselova is a Bulgarian constitutional law expert and the current chair of the National Assembly. She is known for her public disagreements with Petar Iliev regarding legal ethics and plagiarism, which have attracted significant media attention and sparked debates about integrity in academia and politics.
Global Media Ratings
Countries Mentioned
Country | Mentions | Sentiment | Dominance | + Persistence | x Population | = Reach | x GDP (millions) | = Power |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Bulgaria | 16 | 5.38 | 1.63% | +100% | 6,948,445 | 226,426 | $69,000 | 2,248$ |
Romania | 1 | 5.00 | 0.05% | +0% | 19,237,691 | 9,871 | $250,000 | 128$ |
Totals | 17 | 26,186,136 | 236,297 | $319,000 | 2,376$ |
Interactive World Map
Each country's color is based on "Mentions" from the table above.
Recent Mentions
Bulgaria:
Natalia Kiselova is the chairperson of the National Assembly who returned the proposal from the president regarding the adoption of the single currency.
5
Bulgaria:
Natalia Kiselova is mentioned as the chairperson of the National Assembly regarding a referendum on the euro.
5
Bulgaria:
Natalia Kiselova is mentioned as the chairperson of the National Assembly in relation to a referendum proposal.
5
Bulgaria:
Natalia Kiselova quickly distributed the proposed legislative changes to parliamentary committees.
5
Bulgaria:
Natalia Kiselova was mentioned in the context of a vote of no confidence.
5
Bulgaria:
Natalia Kiselova is the chairperson of the National Assembly who returned the proposal from the president regarding the adoption of the euro.
5
Bulgaria:
Natalia Kiselova was elected as the chairperson of the Bulgarian parliament.
6
Bulgaria:
Natalia Kiselova is the chairperson of the parliament whom Zarkov criticized for her handling of the president's proposal.
4
Romania:
Natalia Kiselova, the President of the Bulgarian Parliament, rejected the proposal for a referendum on adopting the euro.
5
Bulgaria:
Natalia Kiselova returned the president's proposal for a referendum on the euro, arguing that it contradicts the Constitution.
4