at least 600 words long post. for below links
Mamondzai
Exampleofpost.docxExample of post. This post is belong to someone its just example.
It’s definitely interesting to take an event like Donald Trump’s second impeachment trial, and look at how different news sources cover it. Obviously, neither coverage transcript is screaming out “Hey! I’m biased!” But it is crystal clear from the wording that you can tell how each news source feels about Donald Trump’s impeachment. In case you don’t know where Fox News and CNN align politically, you need not worry, as their stances are clear as soon as you read the transcript titles. CNN’s left slanted text chain is titled “Trump survived his second impeachment trial today. Here's what you need to know” while Fox’s pro-Trump version of the script is led by “Trump's defense team argued the former president didn't incite the violence at the Capitol” which to me, is a much more defensive tone. I first began with Fox’s article, in which we can gain a better understanding of Fox’s bias. One quote that caught my attention was “Van der Veen calls out Biden, Harris and other Democrats who he says "repeatedly refused to condemn the extremism as riots." It isn’t necessarily Van der Veen’s quote, but it’s Fox’s use of the words “calls out” that makes it feel very pro-Trump. One more that was even more right, was “Senator Whitehouse rocked back in his seat, surprised at Burr’s vote - as if it gave him a momentary glimmer of hope that Trump could be convicted in the end. The rest of the time he nervously fidgeted with his mask.” From the use of “as if it gave him a momentary glimmer of hope” and the snide comment about fidgeting with his mask, the whole thing just screams “Trump 2024” to me. Moving onto CNN’s article, There is definitely some pro-impeachment feelings to the wording they used. A good example is when they talk about how “Chuck Schumer tore into the Senate's decision to acquit former President Trump, calling the vote "un-American" and insulting to patriots who gave their lives for our republic over the centuries.” The way they worded it with the “tore into” part, followed by the way it insulted patriots is definitely a left-slanted view of their distaste for Trump. Regardless of if they openly admit it, both news sources definitely voice their bias through their choice of words.
The two articles I chose were CNNs “Trump acquitted despite new evidence about his failure to protect Pence” and Fox’s “Trump acquitted in second impeachment trial on charge of inciting Jan. 6 Capitol riot” the Fox article wasn’t too much to write about. Considering it was written at a point where Donald Trump was running away with a victory, it was pretty much a recap of what happened during the trial. They discussed the failure to reach the number needed to convict Trump, and they even put the Republicans who voted against him on blast. Of course, being a Fox article, they also definitely made sure to paint Donald Trump in a more positive light, phrasing things like “Trump praised the victory, thanked his supporters and promised he'd soon emerge with a "vision for a bright, radiant, and limitless American future." The CNN one however, was a bit different. Being more left-oriented, they not only recapped the trial, but they definitely critiqued the outcome with some hostile wording. Quotes such as “showing his [Trump] power over the Republican Party despite clear concern among members of his party that he stood by and did not send help at a time when his vice president, members of Congress and police were in danger.” What I think the CNN article did much better than the Fox one, was describe all the evidence brought forward that was used in the attempt to convict. They also highlighted the Republicans who spoke against Trump, and even mentioned how Trump abandoned his vice president.
So, I decided to compare the two articles to other websites in an attempt to test out triangulation. I chose the left leaning CBS, and the more right New York Times. CBS is a fairly left leaning website (not to the extent of CNN, but still left) But I feel as if I actually was reading a fairly balanced article. It relayed the same information as CNN, but without the hostile tone. With the NY times, I felt a similar vibe to the CBS article rather than the Fox article. With both of these newer sites, I felt like I was getting a much more distanced and balanced story. So I think Triangulation is a good strategy, as it doesn’t necessarily discredit the source, but enhances the capabilities of the reader. It shows that we can find factual information in a large pool of different sources.
TRANSCRIPTS USED:
Articles used:
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/13/us/politics/trump-impeachment.html (Links to an external site.)
https://www.cbsnews.com/live-updates/trump-impeachment-trial-senate-acquittal/
