Tuesday, February 2, 2016

Phase 3-5

Hi all

This is the penultimate week for this phase.

Here is the quick version of what I would have covered in class if we had had time:
Newspapers are the rough draft of history
If you can decode the news, you can understand how history gets written, and why people think what they do.

Most sources are regular businesses; they worry about
     readers' preferences

(most have some “opinion" content:
     syndicated columns,

Some sources have varying degrees of connection to the government
     Official publications (government or party)

     Pro-government because of pressure 

NB: there is nothing automatically "wrong" or nefarious about these biases; these people aren't necessarily Bond villains!

What is this source doing and why?
You should by now be able to move beyond the article-by-article analysis and see what the source does in general. Having identified what it is doing, you also should draw some conclusions as to why.


  1. Sana News is always supporting Russian policies, and initiatives also being very subjective as to which informations are reported: only flattering ones about the government. Indeed, this is a pro government paper- which explains the constant support for any Russian interventions. It is against all opposition groups that would be opposed to the government: as some as relatively pro government. Trying to look like a “good guy” nationally so people would “more likely” join government forces than other groups, and internationally to the UN, any countries to make alliances with, etc. To do so, Sana News is for example against terrorism of course and the ambiguity of the Russian strikes are nonexistent.

    The Institute of War is an american think tank that is located in Washington DC. It has as a mission to report information: “SW is a non-partisan, non-profit, public policy research organization.” It is objective and has as a purpose to report “high-confidence” facts, and if some are not 100% trustworthy, they will write down “low-confidence reporting”. Their mission is to “advance an informed understanding of military affairs through reliable research, trusted analysis, and innovative education. We are committed to improving the nation’s ability to execute military operations and respond to emerging threats in order to achieve U.S. strategic objectives.”. The ISW is indirectly pro american (no criticizing of american policies for example), but reports objective information.

  2. The Hill is an American daily private newspaper that is generally a more democratic-oriented news source since it seems to bring great importance to anything related to Obama as he is constantly referred to in articles and usually figures on the most important article of the day. Additionally, The Hill regularly publishes up to date info and is never laid behind, to provide its readers with constant interesting and important news. It also has many tabs on all difference subjects, such as "sports, health, energy, finance, business..." to satisfy all sorts of American readers with news they might be particularly interested in and some tabs are dedicated to a particular on-going issue such as the political campaign of Donald Trump! Finally, the latest articles always have bold titles, intriguing words and big photos to make it almost inevitable for a reader not to read it. The Hill uses those techniques to keep all of their daily readers interested, to keep a stable income and inform the more democratic population on the latest news in the US.

    Fox News is an American news source located in New York that has been accused of bias reporting and promoting the Republican Party. In fact, Fox News' articles usually have a strong opinion on the information they communicate, that can be seen by the articles' provocative titles and the picture they publish, that really influence the readers on the way they see the event. They usually capitalize the first important words of the title to really attract the readers attention or ask rhetoric questions the reader might've never asked himself and is thus to tempted to read. Like The Hill, Fox news had many different tabs on all sorts of subjects to satisfy all types of readers. In fact, it also proposes many videos on the front page for citizens who cannot read well or too lazy to read the articles and thus tries to attract the maximum people. Fox News thus tries by all means to keep a regular income by pulling the readers' attention with provocative terms and ideas that are really out there.

  3. NAIJ.com is a local news source focused on mostly Nigerian news, from daily “gossip” to crucial news about Boko Haram. The tabs of the site are specific to Nigerian actuality: “Latest. Politics. Boko Haram. Biafra Issue. Sports. Entertainment. Weddings. Lagos.” Articles are frequently posted on the site on a daily basis. The headings of each article are generally dramatic and enticing to attract readers. The information is generally simply written and provides context in order to make it accessible. NAIJ’s goals are to provide daily news for Nigerians or people interested solely in Nigeria and to make it alluring and entertaining for the readers.

    The Guardian (international edition) is a British news source focused on international news. The main tabs are mainly based on entertainment, sports, UK, opinion and lifestyle. One tab entitled “world” contains many different tabs each concerning a different region of the world/continent. The Guardian generally selects information that is generalized to a global level. This tab’s goals are to attract intellectual readers interested in worldwide issues. A large part of this site is focused on entertainment or lighter information which is used to attract more readers.

  4. Israeli-Palestinian Conflict

    Al Jazeera:

    Israel suspends detention of Palestinian journalist on hunger strike


    The Guardian:

    Israel's supreme court suspends detention of Palestinian journalist


    These articles both discuss the suspension of Mohammed al-Qeq’s month sentence under Israeli law. Qeq, a news reporter for a Saudi channel, has been on a hunger strike for over two months, in an attempt to protest Israel’s administrative detention law, allowing an individual to be detained indefinitely without trial if deemed a security threat. In this case, Qeq was accused of being involved in terrorist activities linked to Hamas, which he denied. Due to Qeq’s feeble health situation, his sentence has been suspended. Despite discussing the same event, these two articles vary in tone.

    I’ve decided to analyse two sentences, one from each article, that appear to state the same thing, but explain how they are subconsciously sending off different messages.

    The focal sentence in Al Jazeera’s article is “Qeq, 33, is protesting his six-month sentence under Israel’s administrative detention law.” It presents Qeq as an individual attempting to fight against an injustice that has been imposed on him.

    The sentence that expresses the same content in The Guardian is “The 33-year-old journalist refused food in protest at his six-month sentence under Israel’s controversial administrative detention law.” It presents Qeq as someone trying to stir up trouble, whilst refusing an food which is seemingly graciously offered to him. The expression “refused food” also makes Qeq sound somewhat childish, in that he’s refusing to eat since he can’t have things his way.

    While Al Jazeera is presenting Qeq as someone fighting against something that he deems unjust, The Guardian is presenting him as someone who has actively gone looking for trouble. While neither article can confirm wether Qeq was guilty or not, what is clear is that Al Jazeera presents him as the “victim” of his situation, whereas The Guardian presents him as the “troublemaker”. This theme carries out throughout the rest of each respective article.

  5. Ukraine Conflict
    Center for Strategic and International Studies is an american think tank headquartered in Washington D.C., just as ISW is. This non-profit organization tries to deliver raw news from all over the world. It clearly declares itself as being dedicated to ensuring American prominence and prosperity as a force for good in the world. Even though their articles are mostly concise and factual, this source remains influenced by western powers as it provides more information regarding Western activities in global conflicts. Therefore, CSIS tries to report objective information while indirectly emitting a rather positive image of the United States and its Western allies.

    On the other hand, Russia Today is a Russian government funded television network which runs cable and satellite television channels directed to audiences outside the Russian Federation, as well as Internet content in various languages. It delivers major issue news from a Russian viewpoint, giving international audiences an idea of what Russia wants its viewers and readers to think. This means RT is Russian biased, portraying Russia in an advantageous manner due to its tight relations with the government . The aim of Russia Today is to offer information, in most cases one that promotes Russia and its leaders above others, one way or another.

  6. Syrian war
    The ISW is a US think tank. It gives many informations on major conflicts happening around the world. It is dedicated to any adult reader eager to inform himself about any major conflict. It is a trust worthy source and explicitly indicates what informations(websites and reporters) where used to write an article. They qualify these sources of high "confidence articles" or "low confidence" articles. It is not clearly pro US, but the reader can identify several clues to reveal their US focussed articles. They mainly talk about conflicts related to the US. When the US engages in diplomatic relationship, ISW introduces the US's political plans first. Also, lately, in the Syrian war, they have not been reporting the US bombings as much as the Russian ones. Yes, the US has not bombed as much as Russia, but Russian forces have been bombing rebel forces. This convinces, to a certain extent, the reader that the war that Russia is waging is wrong opposed to America's war.

    RT is a journal/TV network funded by the Russian government. It strongly supports Russian positions around the world and is targeted to a vast audience that is pro Russian. RT supports Russia in the Syrian war and, when it can, destabilizes US actions. RT is a very bias source since they will most certainly only say what the Russian governments wants them to say.

  7. Afghanistan

    The NY times is a news source based in the US. On the posts I have read, I noticed a similar way of depicting the events occurring in Afghanistan. They usually offer multiple point of views on the event,for example from the belligerents, the victims and officials. Also, they connect events to broader ones and most often to Western related events.
    The reason why this news source is publishing articles like these are for the readers. Most readers of the NY times are western readers who want politically "advanced" news. Therefore, the NY times publishes detailed reports offering more than one side of the story and tying it to other current events.

    Al Jazeera is a news source based in Qatar. Unlike the NY times, their news reports on Afghanistan events is shorter. These are more concise bits of information followed mostly by victims' and officials' view on incidents. In addition, they remain focused on the place of the event rather than giving broader overviews but do also focus on groups like ISIL if involved.
    Al Jazeera is doing this for multiple reasons. In majority, middle eatern readers look at the news source. Therefore, a greater stress on ISIL is made if possible because of their presence in the Middle East. The shorter and usually one sided reports are because the audience is one that seems to be less politically involved than the one of the NY times.

  8. Iranian Nuclear Conflict:

    Tehran Times is the Iranian international daily newspaper. This news source was created in 1979, right after the Islamic Revolution of Iran, the site proclaims that “The Tehran Times is not the newspaper of the government; it must be a loud voice of the Islamic Revolution and the loudspeaker of the oppressed people of the world,” but is this really the case? Indeed, during this phase I have studied this source and I have noticed that despite Iran’s control over news, the Tehran Times are un-biased in the way they cover news, as they don’t necessarily defend Iran. Because of this, to make money, the Tehran Times have to display publicity on the website to help finance this news, this could be because of the lack of support from the Iranian government.

    The NY Times is a world-renowned news source that covers news in the whole world going from politics to sport and economics, in the form of videos and articles. This source is considered to promote the Democrat Party. In general, this news source is written for a well-educated audience, but the NY Times are starting to show video-article to increase the amount of viewers/readers.

    Mark FAGUER

  9. Venezuela

    During the crisis, Venezuelan medias do play an important role. I think it is important to note that the medias can change the current situation as well as the government and vice versa. They are criticizing the government, thus promoting a coup d'etat. A lot of censorship is therefore being put upon them. Apparently, 37% of the Venezuelan journalists avowed that they censor themselves to avoid judicial threats.

    El Universal and El Nacional are the two most influential newspapers in Venezuela, both based in Caracas.
    El Universal is a private newspaper which was created in 1909. It has always been against the government. During Maduro's presidency, it has been bought by Spanish investors, showing that private media is barely able to survive under Venezuela's Bolivarian government. Since it has been bought, El Universal has always published articles with an external point of view, as if analyzing in general what is going on in the country. It also generally talks about politics because it is really the greatest place for criticism. Sometimes, I feel that their articles are only written to criticize and hold debate. They also have an important opinion page where I feel that Venezuelans really demonstrate their anger towards the crisis and Maduro's incapability. I short, they are just trying to destabilize the government and unify the country (their slogan is: Because you decide daily) against the president..maybe waiting for the right time to start a revolution...

    On the other hand, El Nacional is El Universal's main rival. Historically, it has always been more liberal. It tends to criticize the government as well but seems to be less proactive. It mostly focuses on the Venezuelan society and all its daily problems due to shortages of food, water... I feel that it is trying to entertain its readers so that they forget about the crisis. It therefore has an important sport section and also follows international news. However, it is sometimes ironically criticizing Maduro, but making sure to depict an active president....quite reassuring for the readers...

    However, I do believe it is extremely hard to figure out whether or not the two sources are objective. It is true that the president cannot get his country out of the crisis, but sometimes describing a president who never works is seemingly untrue. I really think that their aggressiveness has gone over the limit.

  10. Afghanistan

    The New York Times is an old newspaper located in New York City. Its audience is mostly Western and therefore in general more demanding in terms of sources and depth - which is why the newspaper often cites government officials, generals, etc... And offers several points of view on the same story.
    The newspaper is quite consistently objective(despite what I might have said in previous posts), mostly because the articles are written by one or two (depends) Afghan reporters, who know well what they are talking about, and use a lot of primary evidence (for the most part, quotes/citations). These can however be a little vague sometimes, when they simply say "government official says".
    Otherwise, the newspaper provides in-depth reports on events.

    On the other hand, The Outlook Afghanistan is a slightly more pro-governmental newspaper. It is entirely independent and strongly affirms it, and is the English-version of the Daily Afghanistan (the two are under one same newspaper organization: the Daily Outlook Afghanistan). It is mostly directed to Afghans, which explains why it depicts in a less objective way the Taliban and ISIS. The natural fear and hatred for the terrorists groups are reflected in the antagonizing portraits of terrorists attacks (which is what it mostly covers along with Taliban/ISIS-connected news), and mirrors the revolted (and justified in my opinion) point of view of the free Afghans.


    Boko Haram
    More suicide bombings and a fire, caused by Boko Haram. The victims are being cared for and Nigerian troops are protecting the village, yet are powerless. The article uses words like ‘unable’ to characterise the armies capacities at protecting the village. The article uses very graphic language, as if it were trying to scare the reader and provide a very realistic image of the events.

    This article depicts another terrorist attack on the village of Maiduguri. It is also said that the government is encouraging the people to help fight Boko Haram. It feels like the tension of this conflict is escalating fast, and the language in this article promotes fear of the terrorist group and pity for the victims


    Boko Haram
    More suicide bombings and a fire, caused by Boko Haram. The victims are being cared for and Nigerian troops are protecting the village, yet are powerless. The article uses words like ‘unable’ to characterise the armies capacities at protecting the village. The article uses very graphic language, as if it were trying to scare the reader and provide a very realistic image of the events.

    This article depicts another terrorist attack on the village of Maiduguri. It is also said that the government is encouraging the people to help fight Boko Haram. It feels like the tension of this conflict is escalating fast, and the language in this article promotes fear of the terrorist group and pity for the victims

  13. The Diplomat is a specialized newspaper that is mainly focused on the economic, political and military status in Eastern and Southern Asia. According to information given from the website, it's based in Tokyo. After having analyzed different aspects of the articles and the newspaper in general, we can see that The Diplomat is a source that is mostly concerned about sharing and editing "opinion content". This can also be proved by the fact that the catch phrase of the source is "Read the Diplomat, Know the Asia-Pacific". The news source has a couple relevant tabs that make it easier for the reader to have access to, not only the articles, but also to multiple blogs, interviews, videos and podcasts. Everything has it's own space. In addition, the article's content is mostly very detailed-out and professional, since the journalists accumulate dense facts in their reports. By adopting this way of reporting the events, The Diplomat demonstrates mostly the Western point of view on the current events. The newspaper certainly does make efforts to make their business keep on going, but they privilege the idea of giving accurate information to their informed and educated public.

    China Daily is a government-controlled newspaper with its headquarters in Beijing. The content is pro-governmental because China's policy is very strict with whoever that leaks any anti-governmental information. There isn't a concrete law stating that doing these things are not allowed, however everyone knows about the implicite pressure. Unlike The Diplomat, China Daily is more a journalism business that a news source. Looking at the different versions, we can say that the source not only wants to attract Chinese reader but certainly a bigger foreign audience to be more interested about the nation. Therefore, its basic goal is to attract people to read it. The journalists do this by adapting their posts and reports to the different nationality editions. In addition, they also write about an incredibly wide range of topics, from governmental and economic issues to culture and lifestyle themes all the way to sport-related topics. The published articles are usually very short and simple to read, and they often include photos to attract all types of audiences. Well, this is all part of the major strategy of the source to build and conserve it's indisputable image in foreign countries and in China.

    1. sorry Mr. Heckscher if it's a bit too long...

  14. Ukraine

    The Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/russia/12142645/Mounting-concerns-over-return-to-Cold-War-style-troop-build-up-in-Europe.html)
    In this article, The Telegraph covers the issue of growing military tensions between Russia and Europe, due to the mistrust between the two parties because of “anti-Russian exercises” and excessive spending on military infrastructure, which could result in the situation of a Cold War-style military build-ups. The article thus relates this local conflict to an international level, perhaps to appeal to its readers who are not necessarily Ukrainian. The article also seems to imply the aggressiveness of the Americans, as it “appears to be” in response to their declaration of increasing military funding to have instigated this mounting of tensions, thus showing the news source’s impartiality.

    Reuters (http://www.reuters.com/article/us-ukraine-crisis-dutch-idUSKCN0VF0SE)
    This article is a follow up of the article about the Dutch referendum about Ukraine; this time the Dutch foreign minister explains how a possible negative response could force the government to ratify the treaty of closing bonds with Ukraine. This article too is not centred on Ukraine’s domestic problems, but rather on its implications on the European level. It is also an economic perspective as the Dutch’s main concern is that this treaty could harm their “economic security after years of sluggish growth.”

    Adrien Lopez

  15. North Korean conflict

    BBC is a world news agency based in the United Kingdom, owned by the UK government. There are numerous BBC networks such as news, sport, and culture. The BBC News website has many tabs focused on a variety of subjects (business, tech, science, world, UK, entertainment) to please, inform, and target a larger audience of any age. They report on international events from the UK’s perspective, quoting diverse worldwide sources. For the North Korean conflict, they provide insight on the country’s activities where no information is filtering from. While trying to be objective, the goal of this media is to relate the facts in a way that supports the government’s position on the events. In addition, BBC News is aiming at posting detailed and complete articles with context, using simple words for everyone’s comprehension.

    The Korean Central News Agency is the state news agency of North Korea: it is thus pro-North Korean government. It mainly propagates the revolutionary ideology of the Leader Kim Il-sung and denounces the actions of Japan, South Korea, and especially the US, always described with aggressive words. The language is subjective and judgmental. The few posted pictures depict the leader’s activities and valorise the country to make it appear as flourishing. Their goal is to put forth a positive image of the country for their population and the world to see. The names of North Korea’s leaders are always written bigger and in bold to emphasize their importance. KCNA is making NK appear as an innocent nation simply trying to develop their self-defense while being constantly pressured by the US. Additionally, several countries in the world are reported to have openly congratulated NK’s achievement. Therefore, this propaganda serves to convince the North Koreans of other countries’ support, that North Korea’s actions are legitimate, and that the US is an enemy. However, the reliability of certain facts and assertions is questionable.

  16. -The telegraph.co.uk is a digitalized form of The Daily Telegraph which is a British daily morning English-language broadsheet newspaper which covers world news. The logo of the newspaper is not so big and has a nice font, the reader can see it but it is not the only thing one can see on the page and since it’s also in black, it does not catch the eye automatically therefore the newspaper is concentrating on the content and not so much on the form. The newspaper also has many advertisements and other stories they had written in the sidebars. Since they are a free news source, they must have as many readers as they can and the use of many pictures in the articles illustrate but also show that they are trying to get a point across through pictures but also the text. They are free to write anything they want and they mainly take the people’s defense which shows that they care about the citizens and they want to raise awareness.

    - Daily News Egypt is a daily newspaper in Egypt which covers mainly news of Egypt but sometimes a little about their neighboring countries but not often otherwise they show other paper’s articles. Therefore Daily News Egypt mainly writes about Egypt using many pictures to illustrate what they are saying and to show (if needed) the atrocities of one event. They refer to themselves as the only “independent” newspaper but even them are supervised by the Egyptian government because they reflect the government’s points of view. They cannot express their real opinion since Egypt has issued a law against any news source against the government’s ideas.

  17. The Sudan Tribune is a news site about local events in Sudan, South Sudan, and its neighboring countries. It has a tendency to criticize the current government's actions, in particular their passive attitude towards the frightful civil war that has been going on for the past five years. The passive attitude of the rest of the world also tends to be criticized in this news outlet, illustrating the fact that the humanitarian aid that is being given to South Sudan is insufficient. Like I had mentioned in a previous post, they attempt to obtain a more international audience and expand their reach with their logo and subtitle. This news source therefore wants the world to be interested in the happenings in South Sudan, and also wants to criticize the current government.

    The UN news center is a source that tends to be objective, as it regroups the opinion of a multitude of countries and had to be as objective as possible to respect each country's interest. The UN News Center’s goal is more to deliver a fact as opposed to emitting an opinion. They tend however to be subjective in the matter of the humanitarian aid they deliver across the world, seeing themselves as “saviours” of these countries, when in reality that is not always the case, as contested by the local news sources (ex. South Sudan)

  18. The Guardian is a news source based in Britain, but focused on international news. The newspapers main page has articles from all over the world on all kinds of issues. The aim of this source is to inform the population on world news, however it is a company, and not government owned so it does have entertainment pieces, and articles that are not very intellectual. The goal of this newspaper is to inform and entertain readers.

    China Daily is government owned, and the news published is in accordance with what the Chinese government wants to divulge to the public. The European version of the newspaper has international news but usually in relation with China. The aim of this newspaper is to inform, however since it is government owned we can tell what the government wants the population to think by looking at what they publish.

  19. East China Sea

    Reuters is an international news agency based in the United States. It is completely independent from the the government and publishes articles in multiple languages such as English, French, Spanish, Arabic, German... (in order to attract a broader, international audience). According to their company values they are 100% neutral though in the past some people have criticized them over the use of the word "terrorist" (although they vow to only use the word in direct quotes). There are also some controversies over the "selective censoring" of certain reader comments. Otherwise, Reuters doesn't have any apparent agenda and is not affiliated to a political party. They mostly try to appeal to men and women with "well payed jobs" (for lack of a better name) with an interest in finance, economics and world news. However they do offer more mainstream news (lifestyle) in order to attract a wider audience therefore making more profit.

    China Daily is a China-centered and government-controlled newspaper based in Beijing. As opposed to Reuters it is heavily opinionated because of China's strict influence on national newspapers. When talking about conflicts involving other countries than China the newspaper often takes China's side and in most cases only cites its side of the story. They also seem to focus on giving very general news ranging from geopolitical issues to (for example) what David Beckham wore the other day. It sometimes favors cultural news over important world news as we can see here(http://imgur.com/yLs6xmR). They present what they deem important with big bold text and images that cover almost the whole page. This is obviously done to attract readers with diverse interests but that still prefer "light" news since most of the articles are written in short, simple paragraphs.

    This article covers the difficulties of the Palestinians working in Israel, from passing a packed checkpoint at 3AM to the fear of being mistaken for a terrorist. By Covering the Palestinian’s misery it leans on the Palestinian side but does not criticize the Israeli.

    This article brings up the question of whether Gaza is a part of Israel. Goods made in Gaza are not allowed to be labeled “Made in Israel”, but that law is “inconsistently enforced”. The article shows no clear bias, but the use of expressions such as “inconsistent” or “under the guise of” show that the source slightly depreciates the Israeli side.

  21. Thailand:

    Bangkok Post:
    The Bangkok Post is the most read official Thai newspaper in english, it is therefore very controlled by the government. The articles' angles seem to be oriented in a way to believe that the Prime Minister is irreproachable. The majority of articles have an image, for example here to show the PM's powerful speech with many microphones pointing at him.

    The Telegraph is an english newspaper, which has a Thailand section. However, it seems to only write about articles that do not only involve Thailand but that always have a link to the UK. This week, although major issues are happening in Thailand (see Bangkok Post), three out of five articles talk about a British tourist killed by an elephant.

  22. AQAP

    Yemen Post is the more “official” and/or widely accepted of my sources: according to the hourly updated site, the printed version is distributed to over 2000 government institutions, embassies, organizations, businesses throughout Yemen, along with foreign distribution to neighboring countries, and some communities within Europe and the United States. Therefore the information it broadcasts tends to be more objective, with a wide public approach, also due to the fact that is is written in English.

    News Yemen is a small, mostly unknown and exclusively online news source. Although the information I’ve obtained over the past weeks has been translated from Arabic (the only language the site is available to be read in), the overly simplistic layout (very few pictures, all text the same, very short articles) and lack of information as to who created the site or who writes each article may suffice to indicate its small influence. Although this can only be supposed, the selection of data and non objective voice seem to imply that News Yemen is pro-Houthi, or in favor of the rebellion against the Yemeni government.

  23. Libya conflict
    AL Jazeera: http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2016/02/tunisia-completes-barrier-libya-border-160207075238223.html
    Topic: This article talks about the Barrier that was built between Libya and Tunisia. It was surprising to see the way Al Jazeera presented the facts involving this project. When an important event occurs in or around an Arabic country like Libya, the news outlet usually analyses it in profound detail. Here, Al Jazeera briefly states that a trench full of water has been dug to stop Terrorist attacks on the capital, which it was built in part by the US and Germany and finally that 6000 terrorists Tunisians have travelled to fight in Iraq, Syria and Libya.
    BBC: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-35515229
    Topic: The article is almost identical to Al Jazeera’s. The BBC tells the reader that a wall has been built in order to stop the moving of military vehicles and terrorists from crossing Tunisia and Libya. It gives us the length of the barrier, what material it is built from, which countries funded the construction and that it has efficiently hindered terrorists from crossing the neighbouring countries. The BBC however states that “more than 3000 Tunisians have travelled to fight in Iraq, Syria and Libya.

    Angle: As I have already suggested the articles are pretty much identical. The one thing that really struck me was the difference in the number of Tunisians going to fight for Terrorist groups. The actual number is 6000 but one cannot say that the BBC was false in saying “more than 3000”, they were theoretically right but more than 3000 would indicate that it is between 3-4000 not the double. The BBC dimming down the truth in order to reassure its national audience may raise a few eyebrows.

  24. http://www.lemonde.fr/afrique/article/2016/02/03/mali-des-combattants-loyalistes-entrent-dans-kidal-sans-heurt_4858378_3212.html

    Peace is on the horizon as a rebel group and the government peacefully meet up and sign a treaty, symbol of peace, in Kidal. Le monde ends all its articles on Mali with the same paragraph on the conflict. What the paper is trying to do is try to keep the French public interested in a conflict far from home that not many people care about.

    This source makes the treaty seem a lot less important as it mentions that the two parties are rebel groups (which is important but not as important as Le Monde says). Mali actu is giving out facts and what happened in an objective way for locals to inform themselves.

  25. South China Sea:
    China Daily:
    So as we know China Daily is a government controlled newspaper. This is very important because when you read their articles, there is never once a negative or damaging comment on China. They actually make it seem like it is the best. Plus, when you go on their site there is ALWAYS something positive and interesting about China. For instance, right now it is about a flash mob for China's new year in NYC. So there is always positive stuff on China and its people.

    So everyone knows NYT and how it is. It's a private newspaper which isn't completely free, because you have to pay after you read 10 articles in a month. It is BS but understandable, because it needs business. SO, an interesting thing about NYT is that it doesn't use shock to attract people. NYT is known as something sophisticated so people read it to feel smart or look smart I bet. Additionally, they stay very neutral on subjects and present the arguments and views of all the sides in a story. Which is really good because not only will people think you are smarter by reading NYT but you legitimately be.

    The Mexican Times, as its slogan indicates, aims to think globally while remaining local. (Piensa global, opina local). It’s aimed at a more educated, richer population; the bright colors and “fun” design must serve to appeal at a slightly younger audience, perhaps students or young workers. There’s an opinion column on the far right with editorials ranking from consumerism, the power of social media, to government issues with water or why political and social education is important. However, it’s articles try to remain factual and distant; the articles on the drug war so far have been very detached, short and to the point. This source is simply retracing the events of the drug war in the most objective way possible, which is interesting as it is directly concerned by this threat.
    The New York Times, however, remains much more global and doesn’t always focus on the Mexican Drug War. When it does, it goes into a lot of detail and goes to great lengths, describing the story in great detail and giving a lot of background information. Its headlines seek to grab the reader’s attention whilst remaining professional; it has a black and white layout with a fancy font for the title. The New York Times are also trustworthy yet don’t seem as concerned by the problem as it strives to cover the most worldwide events possible.

  27. The Yemen Post :
    The Yemen Post is a dedicated news source that gives news about the situation in Yemen daily. It seems that it is written by journalists that only want their country to come back to normal, as we can often see on their twitter account once again, the paper posts shocking events related to the Yemen war like « Today’s death toll », the destruction of 1000 year old manuscripts or how many bombings occured in the country in a day. With this, the newspaper looks more active, militant, and actually angered by the conflict.

    Al Jazeera :
    Al Jazeera’s articles differ a lot from on to another, som are shorter, sometimes missing critical information that can be found on other websites (such as the Yemen Post). Even if it posts less often than the Yemen Post news of the conflict in the country, when it does the articles are detailed, and extremely helpful (such as this recent one with a graphic showing who supports who in this confusing conflict : http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2016/02/civilians-trapped-battle-yemen-taiz-160204161746959.html ). The paper functions by sending crews in cities of Yemen to report, is on top of this impartial, describing the facts as they take place to denounce any injustice, which makes it a valuable source.

    CNN: http://money.cnn.com/2016/02/05/technology/twitter-terrorists-isis/index.html

    Foxnews: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2016/02/05/twitter-moves-to-actively-seek-out-terrorist-supporter

    These two articles are both from february 5th, they discuss the ongoing issue of terrorist groups recruiting online. They two articles concentrate on twitter, who has has adopted new mesures in order to avoid fake accounts as well as terroist groups trying to recrute. CNN makes the issue sound alarming by naming the article :Twitter goes to war with ISIS, in bold font. The foxnews article sounds less dramatic. The CNN article has much more details concerning the issue as well as concentrating in particular on twitter and ISIS when the other article generalizes on twitter and terrorist groupq.

  29. Uighur Conflict
    This source is usually considered as one of the most reliable as well as non-biased news sources. It attempts to avoid bias by having reporters from all over the world and by reporting only the essential facts. However, while talking about the Chinese government’s actions and reactions with regards to its conflict with the Uighur population in China, Reuters isn’t always entirely unbiased. They seem to implicitly criticize the government by implying that the Chinese government is acting in a way that is purposefully harming the Uighurs, even if no evidence shows that this might be the case. A strong majority of sources, or at least of western sources, openly agree on these intentions being true, but by implying their validity, Reuters is being slightly biased.

    China Daily
    Contrary to the assumptions I had before studying this news source, China Daily is surprisingly accurate in all their reports linked to the Uighur conflict. What gives them the reputation of being biased is not their lack of factual evidence or their selective reporting (even if it is clearly present), but rather the way they present the information. The titles are not overly flashy or chosen to be ‘click-bait’y, in order to give the impression of an unbiased website. However, the information is presented in such a way that is seems that many, if not all problems in Xinjiang, are caused directly or indirectly by Uighur actions. Terrorist activities justify many socio-economic problems. For example, in order to discreetly make the link between the two in the reader's mind, two paragraphs, one about terrorist activity and another about economic problems in the region, are presented in succession, with no linking words or sentences. This associates the two, making them seem linked. The reason this would be considered biased (taking this example), is because many different elements contribute to any economic problems in the region, even if terrorist activity might be one. This specific example is often used in articles about the Uighur conflict

  30. Iranian nuclear conflict:

    Tehran Times: http://www.tehrantimes.com/index_View.asp?code=252837
    This article talks about the U.S and Iran resuming their exports after two years of not doing so. As Tehran Times does so often it is trying to show the fact that the U.S and Iran are advancing in their relationship. The newspaper seems to want to be direct with very short paragraphs that explain with numbers the point very clearly. It seems they don't want any questions on the matter, just facts.

    NY Times: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/01/world/middleeast/iran-sanctions-oil-investment.html?ref=topics&_r=0

    This article talks about the debate going on in Iran about how Iran should handle their deals with the "giants" of the oil industry. It is interesting to see that the newspaper uses the word Giant to describe foreign countries to Iran. This shows their point of view which is that Iran should be more open to the outside world. Hassad Rouhani seems to agree with this idea.

    Nicolas Rival

  31. The Times of India is owned by Bennett, Coleman & Co Ldt, a British company, that bases its revenue on the amount of sales it has. So obviously, it would want to say things that the people support, and since its public is Indian, it definitely wants to say things that will please the Indians reading it. Since there is overall public distaste for Pakistan, the Times of India rarely posts positive news about the country. Therefore, not only is it biased towards the Indian point of view, it is also trying to advertise itself. Furthermore, the company has been often criticized for its refusal to cite Indian sources. Thus leading the readers to sometimes wonder if the story is that credible.

    Dawn.com, is a Pakistani national news source, which means that everything that is said is first run by the government. Therefore, it is government controlled, which would explain why there are certain articles that appear and disappear on the website, that are not present on other news sources. Of course, the government is also against India, more precisely, the Indian occupation of Kashmir, they thus have a pretty biased point of view with anything related to India. They do cite their sources, so we can check where their information is coming from. They also seem to omit some information when discussing terrorism, since they use vague language, and do not give enough details. Then again it could just de the quality of the journalists, despite this source being the most read English news source in Pakistan.

  32. Al Jazeera

    Al Jazeera was originally created as an Arabic news channel in 1996. Since then, it has expanded and now offers an online website. The website’s structure is professional and offers op-eds as well as “regular” news reports. This outlet covers largely stories about the Middle East. It is important to note that Al Jazeera is a state-funded news outlet, and is additionally largely funded by the ruling family of Qatar. Despite claiming to be independent from the government of Qatar, the network has been accused of being a “propaganda outlet” for the Qatari government, as well as illustrating mainly Islamist perspectives. In the case of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, Al Jazeera appears to target readers that are pro-Palestine, but does so by subtle methods, such as employing slight vocabulary nuances that have particular connotations, without being factually incorrect.

    The Guardian

    The Guardian is a British news source founded in 1821. The Guardian’s online website offers several columns, from UK and world news to “lifestyle, culture, sports.” This outlet aims to inform their readers on current events through “serious” articles, but also offers op-eds and more humorous articles. The Guardian is not government owned, and for that reason does not appear to have a particular bias. Despite being a business, this outlet has pledged to not allow political or commercial influence alter their news reports. In addition, although they include some less “serious” pieces, the news reports by The Guardian are well written and worthy of intellectual readers.