The United States’ government shutdown debacle created a lot
of news and a got a lot of people talking about how it would affect the
American people and who was at fault. There were plenty articles to choose
from, but two articles in particular went very far to show the absolute
disconnect between the supporters of the House Republicans and the rest of the USA.
The first article is a very biased opinion piece published
by Erick Erickson, a Fox News reporter.
It started off by downplaying the affect of the shutdown and ridiculing
those who were concerned by it, stating, “The government is
shut down. The military still serves…Hospitals and schools still
operate. The TSA still pats down passengers... But the government is shut
down.” Clearly this is intended to make
it seem as if the government being shut down isn’t a big deal and doesn’t
actually affect anyone, and that anyone saying otherwise is blowing it out of
proportion. The article goes on to say
that the blame doesn’t lie with the House Republicans, but rather with Harry
Reid and President Obama, because they refused to negotiate. The article continues on to say that the
House Republicans should stand their ground until they get their way, because the
shutdown isn’t actually hurting anything.
The second article was published by
Josh Levs on CNN.com and focuses on the immediate effects of the government
shutdown on the American people. Rather
than a blasé dismissal of the problem, as with the previous article, this one
is intended to show how many people the shutdown is effecting. Having intent to make a point does make this
article biased, but it’s not based simply on opinion as was Erickson’s. The article focuses on making the people
effected seem real to the reader, using phrases such as a “a father of six” and
“women and children” to garner sympathy. It tells the reader that the government
shutdown is hurting children, taking away their food from their mouths with the
cancellation of WIC and blocking them from receiving education in the Head
Start program. The article is ended with
first person accounts of how the government shutdown is affecting real American
people. While clearly a biased piece, it
is framed around the facts of the shutdown.
I started reading knowing exactly how I felt about the
issue, and reading both articles did nothing to change my mind because I had
already read plenty about the situation and formed an opinion. However biased I may be, it is clear that
both articles are failing to show what is affected by the shutdown and what is
not. One article makes it out that there
is no issue, while the other makes out that everyone’s lives are now falling
apart. Presenting the information in
full outside of their chosen frames would have made both articles much more
useful news sources.
This selection of articles relates rather well to the others below, especially the one titled 'project' where the Washington Post article similarly aims to counter the suggestions that the shutdown doesn't matter. There are some really perceptive observations here about how the personalisation of the issue aims to demonstrate the importance in terms of how if affects people (the news value 'meaningfulness' perhaps?) - the references to women and children seem to frame those affected people up as vulnerable victims in increase empathy for them, even among those not affected themselves.
ReplyDeleteIt's interesting that the British media gave an impression that both sides were blaming the other, and there are examples of blame on Obama in some of the other posts, but it is notable that the US media seems largely to agree across both political sides that it was the Republicans that were holding up agreement, but the right also believe in small government and are more concerned with law and order, which was unaffected, rather than welfare.