I have chosen to analyze two different articles, one from CNN and one from FOX News, both articles report on the same event, a rocket barrage by Palestinians against Israel.
I would like to start my analysis by taking a look at the headlines for the different articles mostly because it is the first thing you read but also since the headline of an article is designed to get your attention and sets the mood for the rest of the of the text. If we take a look at the FOX headline in regards to end weight, that new and important information is put at the end of sentences, we see that the fox article tries to shift the focus not to where the attack took place but who actually fired the rockets, in this case Palestinian militants. The CNN headline on the other hand does not mention the word militant or even theorize on the culprit at all in the headline. In fact the word militant is not used until line nine in the article and even then they do not mention the word in conjunction with the rocket attack. The FOX headline also uses a quote directly in the headline, a quote which is used out of context, for the purpose of making the attack sound bigger and grander. 'Massive', to me, is a word a lot like 'awesome' in the sense that both words imply some kind awe. A massive attack, to me, is on an epic scale, an attack almost like an invasion of, in this case, Israel. By using the word FOX need not say the number of rockets fired but they simply imply the number to the reader, in this case a huge number, and if FOX ever were to be queried on the subject of the number of rockets fired they would be in the clear because, as I said, the word massive does not specify a number at all. The CNN headline does not imply a number at all but simply states that a rocket was fired into Israel from Gaza or rather that it was only one of them that hit a coastal city. In fact CNN even states that the rocket, the one, fired hit a target, in this case a coastal city. The FOX headline on the other hand simply says that massive amounts of rockets were fired and I would even go so far as to state that the FOX headline implies to the reader that the militants firing the rockets are stupid and unskilled and therefore could not hit the broad side of a barn if they stood in it, or something in that direction. I do admit that my analysis is tainted by the fact that I do know that FOX has a right wing bias, and are not ashamed of spinning their news that way, and because of that they tend to take the side of Israel no matter what.
Let us leave the headlines and proceed into the vast jungles that make up the text of these articles. The FOX article is a bit longer and a bit more detailed than the CNN one. The text tends to focus a lot on what the Palestinians did and justifying the actions of the Israelis. The Israeli airstrike is mentioned only as a subclause at first in the FOX article. While the CNN article, on the other hand, makes it quite clear that the rockets were following the Israeli airstrike. The FOX article later on describes the underlying factors to the conflict, but that is after they have made sure the focus is on the rocket attack that the Palestinian militants made. They finish off the background to the conflict by naming the casualties in the different incidents as Hamas militants and by doing so justifying the actions of the Israelis and again implying blame to the Palestinians. Fox then later on in the article mention that since the ceasefire has been put in place the Palestinians have provoked Israel on several occasions’, again shifting responsibility and blame away from Israel, with other attacks.
The CNN article, though it uses the word militant, only uses the word militant in conjunction with the word Hamas and they do thereby avoid calling all Palestinians a paramilitary force, which the FOX article do not. The CNN article sets aside a large quantity of text, relative to the article size, to describe the types of rockets used. They make a point that the rockets are crude and not very accurate, almost harmless, which of course they are not. CNN also cites representatives of Hamas and the Palestinians as sources for their article which sends a signal the reader, an Israeli partial American, that CNN has taken the time to see things from both perspectives, which may or may not be true. The only reference FOX does is a quote from an email from Hamas towards the end of the article, other than that they seem to be citing facts gained through the Israeli army and its representatives.
The last thing I would like to bring up is the difference in the amounts of rockets fired. In the CNN article there were about twenty rockets fired and one hit. The one that hit was a Quasam rocket, which they describe as crude and primitive. The FOX article describes that there were at least thirty rockets fired. The use of massive in conjunction at least implies to the reader that probably a lot more were fired. FOX also states, instead of saying there were no injuries, that there was no immediate word of injuries or damage which implies that there were injuries and damage, just not reported immediately. However the article leaves it at that, they never say if there were any reports later on, they leave that up to the reader’s imagination.
Since I am running out of space I am going to try and sum it all up. FOX makes no secret of it being partisan to the Israelis in its article and even though the article is more detailed than the one from CNN the extra details tend to work as a justification to the actions of the Israelis and their pre-emptive strikes. CNN at least makes a stab at being unpartisan although they obviously, in most cases and even so in this article, tend to side with the Israelis.
I would like to start my analysis by taking a look at the headlines for the different articles mostly because it is the first thing you read but also since the headline of an article is designed to get your attention and sets the mood for the rest of the of the text. If we take a look at the FOX headline in regards to end weight, that new and important information is put at the end of sentences, we see that the fox article tries to shift the focus not to where the attack took place but who actually fired the rockets, in this case Palestinian militants. The CNN headline on the other hand does not mention the word militant or even theorize on the culprit at all in the headline. In fact the word militant is not used until line nine in the article and even then they do not mention the word in conjunction with the rocket attack. The FOX headline also uses a quote directly in the headline, a quote which is used out of context, for the purpose of making the attack sound bigger and grander. 'Massive', to me, is a word a lot like 'awesome' in the sense that both words imply some kind awe. A massive attack, to me, is on an epic scale, an attack almost like an invasion of, in this case, Israel. By using the word FOX need not say the number of rockets fired but they simply imply the number to the reader, in this case a huge number, and if FOX ever were to be queried on the subject of the number of rockets fired they would be in the clear because, as I said, the word massive does not specify a number at all. The CNN headline does not imply a number at all but simply states that a rocket was fired into Israel from Gaza or rather that it was only one of them that hit a coastal city. In fact CNN even states that the rocket, the one, fired hit a target, in this case a coastal city. The FOX headline on the other hand simply says that massive amounts of rockets were fired and I would even go so far as to state that the FOX headline implies to the reader that the militants firing the rockets are stupid and unskilled and therefore could not hit the broad side of a barn if they stood in it, or something in that direction. I do admit that my analysis is tainted by the fact that I do know that FOX has a right wing bias, and are not ashamed of spinning their news that way, and because of that they tend to take the side of Israel no matter what.
Let us leave the headlines and proceed into the vast jungles that make up the text of these articles. The FOX article is a bit longer and a bit more detailed than the CNN one. The text tends to focus a lot on what the Palestinians did and justifying the actions of the Israelis. The Israeli airstrike is mentioned only as a subclause at first in the FOX article. While the CNN article, on the other hand, makes it quite clear that the rockets were following the Israeli airstrike. The FOX article later on describes the underlying factors to the conflict, but that is after they have made sure the focus is on the rocket attack that the Palestinian militants made. They finish off the background to the conflict by naming the casualties in the different incidents as Hamas militants and by doing so justifying the actions of the Israelis and again implying blame to the Palestinians. Fox then later on in the article mention that since the ceasefire has been put in place the Palestinians have provoked Israel on several occasions’, again shifting responsibility and blame away from Israel, with other attacks.
The CNN article, though it uses the word militant, only uses the word militant in conjunction with the word Hamas and they do thereby avoid calling all Palestinians a paramilitary force, which the FOX article do not. The CNN article sets aside a large quantity of text, relative to the article size, to describe the types of rockets used. They make a point that the rockets are crude and not very accurate, almost harmless, which of course they are not. CNN also cites representatives of Hamas and the Palestinians as sources for their article which sends a signal the reader, an Israeli partial American, that CNN has taken the time to see things from both perspectives, which may or may not be true. The only reference FOX does is a quote from an email from Hamas towards the end of the article, other than that they seem to be citing facts gained through the Israeli army and its representatives.
The last thing I would like to bring up is the difference in the amounts of rockets fired. In the CNN article there were about twenty rockets fired and one hit. The one that hit was a Quasam rocket, which they describe as crude and primitive. The FOX article describes that there were at least thirty rockets fired. The use of massive in conjunction at least implies to the reader that probably a lot more were fired. FOX also states, instead of saying there were no injuries, that there was no immediate word of injuries or damage which implies that there were injuries and damage, just not reported immediately. However the article leaves it at that, they never say if there were any reports later on, they leave that up to the reader’s imagination.
Since I am running out of space I am going to try and sum it all up. FOX makes no secret of it being partisan to the Israelis in its article and even though the article is more detailed than the one from CNN the extra details tend to work as a justification to the actions of the Israelis and their pre-emptive strikes. CNN at least makes a stab at being unpartisan although they obviously, in most cases and even so in this article, tend to side with the Israelis.
Inga kommentarer:
Skicka en kommentar