Working off of the last post, I have decided to compare news
coverage of current events surrounding conflict. I will be looking at news
media sources that have a variety of the perceived agendas and will review how
those agendas vary on the coverage of the story at hand. The three particular
news agencies’ I’ll be looking at are BBC World, PBS News, and FOX News. Along
with my summaries of the reporting styles I’ll include a video segments
released by the news agencies with the story of the attack at the Israeli bus
station.
Before
addressing the particular conflict at hand I would like to talk about a few
guidelines of my analysis on the different styles of reporting how to bring the
issues to light. News media appeals to different types of thought processes
through 3 main methods: ethos (credibility/authenticity/reliability), logos (central
argument, structure of argument), and pathos (appeal to emotions).
bbc.com/world
The topic that I’ll be covering this
posting is the attack on an Israeli bus station that occurred on October 18th,
2015. The conflict itself is based on a long-standing issue between Israel and
Palestine is small militant groups from each nation carry out a series of small
attacks. The conflict between the two groups has gone on for decades, the causes
of the initial conflict simply will not be discussed in this blog posting as it
is too politically and historically charged. In the previous posting, I
discussed how agency plays a large role the decisions that each group makes. Since
there is a great deal of historical significance within this conflict few
decisions are truly based upon agency as it is often a never-ending cycle of
retaliation attack. When looking at the different reporting styles on the topic
the three different news agencies very their approaches to eat those logos and
pathos. Despite how objective the news source may seem all them have their own
agenda and it is our responsibility to find out exactly how that relates to the
issues being presented.
bbc.com/world
First let’s take a look atBBC World’sreporting on the issue. Notably, BBC did not release a video clip about the
conflict. When looking at BBC’s article on the attack, the format
really appeals to the logos of the issue. The way that the BBC page is
formatted adds to a central argument and structure, which is characteristic
good of logos. The article first goes over abbreviated facts that paint a
picture for the reader, before they begin reading about the incident. While
this is quite convenient for the reader, it also allows them to push their own
personal agenda as they provide the initial source information on conflict.
Next, let’s take a look at PBS’sWorld news section to look at the reports on the attack.
pbs.org
As opposed to
the traditional style of reporting, with long background on the history of the conflict
between Israel and Palestine, PBS’s approach is more direct. This appeals to
the ethos of the story, creating well-rounded and reliable report. Ethos style
reporting is authentic and credible in nature, and PBS has a little opinionated
reporting on the conflict. PBS has journalists in Israel, reporting on the
issue, giving it a much more objective feel. By doing this, they add as much factual
information as possible to try to eliminate any overt bias.Though the majority of news stations tend to
exhibit a political stance, PBS does a good job of remaining neutral.
When talking about FOX News,
there is an immediate conservative bias that is associated with their
reporting. FOX News appeals to the pathos of the viewer and reader as they
employ an in-person style of writing when doing their journalism. In their
piece, they use first hand accounts of the incident citing policemen,
civilians, and the first responders to the scene. Despite their general bias’s,
the reporting in this article was largely objective. Though the written piece was largely objective, the interview conducted on air (see video) paints a very different picture, as the news anchor and the reporter talk in very anti Palestinian language.
bbc.com/world
All in all, the events that happen
in Israel were tragic but it speaks to the larger conflict between Palestine
and Israel.The main point of this whole
analysis was to look at the different reporting styles of various media outlets
and see how each one uses logos and pathos impacted the reporting. When looking
at the effectiveness of all these reporting strategies they clearly all have
their own base that turn to them for their news.Though we cannot make a general statement,
connecting people to news networks, it is clear that the values of ethos,
logos, and pathos lead people to different sources for their information.
Works Cited
"Israel-Palestinian
Violence: Israeli Killed in Beersheva Bus Station Attack - BBC News." BBC
News. N.p., n.d. Web. 18 Oct. 2015.
"One Dead,
Several Hurt after Shooting, Knife Attack on Israeli Bus Station." Fox
News. FOX News Network, 18 Oct. 2015. Web. 18 Oct. 2015.
Srinivasan, Hari.
"Israel Responds to Deadly Wave of Knife Attacks with New Police
Powers." PBS. PBS, n.d. Web. 18 Oct. 2015.
This is a very analytical post on how media outlets can be bias and push their own political agenda. I also wrote about how media outlets can be bias, so that their ratings can also stay high or even go up. I wrote about the war in Syria and how media outlets like to include as much as they can about American involvement so that American will be more interested in the subject. This tells us that some Americans are very self-centered and for them to be interested in an article, American have to be involved in it.
From the start I can already tell this a very well thought out and intellectual post. The way you introduce the topic and how you will be going about the analysis is extremely sophisticated. you did a great job extracting how each report used either pathos, logos, or ethos and how their uses shaped each report. Your insight on how these appeals cause people to go to specific news outlets is definitely valid. People want to here something they agree with and they will go to the news that suits their needs even if it skews the truth a little bit.
This is a very analytical post on how media outlets can be bias and push their own political agenda. I also wrote about how media outlets can be bias, so that their ratings can also stay high or even go up. I wrote about the war in Syria and how media outlets like to include as much as they can about American involvement so that American will be more interested in the subject. This tells us that some Americans are very self-centered and for them to be interested in an article, American have to be involved in it.
ReplyDeleteFrom the start I can already tell this a very well thought out and intellectual post. The way you introduce the topic and how you will be going about the analysis is extremely sophisticated. you did a great job extracting how each report used either pathos, logos, or ethos and how their uses shaped each report. Your insight on how these appeals cause people to go to specific news outlets is definitely valid. People want to here something they agree with and they will go to the news that suits their needs even if it skews the truth a little bit.
ReplyDelete@rajan the girls over at ASU wanna know.. how often do you lift ?
ReplyDeleteIf you're writing these masterpieces all the time
Delete