How Do Popular Online News Sources Present the Same Information?
This morning, I decided to do an experiment. I decided to find a story common to Fox News, MSNBC, ABC News, CNN, The Associated Press, BBC, The Christian Science Monitor (look it up on Wikipedia to understand its name), Al Jazeera English, the Huffington Post, the New York Times and the Washington Post and compare-contrast them. I would advise against opening all of those sites at one time unless you have copious amounts of RAM to donate to them as most of them seem to have found web designers that absolutely love flash. That aside, this post will be rather lengthy. I’m also looking for several more conservative news sources to compare-contrast with these, so if you have any suggestions, please let me know in the comment section.
My method to find a story. I found a story common to both the BBC and Al Jazeera English. The story I chose is about protesters in Thailand hurling their own blood at the home of their Prime Minister. However, several of the websites do not have that story yet. They have what happened earlier, the protesters hurling their own blood at the prime minister’s governmental office. Fox News and the Associated Press have both stories. However, as much as I like debate, try to be civil, don’t use terms like “Faux News” or the “Huffington Puffington Post”. Those terms are demeaning to both organizations and make you look less credible. Also, do not comment with the sole purpose to bash the Christian Science Monitor. Read this wikipedia article about their name. As much as I dislike censorship, I will not allow comments that use those terms or only bash the CSM (if it’s credible, I may edit your comment to conform to those standards). I don’t want to have to do that, so don’t make me. This article will be long and I’m sure there will be plenty of flak shot at me from both sides. As of 7:00 AM CDT (GMT-5) The New York Times, MSNBC and the Christian Science Monitor do not have stories on the blood hurled at the Thailand Prime Minister’s house. The Washington Post requires me to register to view their World News, which I refuse so they will not be included in this. I will compare the ones that have the current story. Let us begin with the more current story. I will post the first paragraph of each article and compare them at the end.
BANGKOK — Red-shirted protesters hurled plastic bags filled with their own blood into the residential compound of Thailand’s prime minister Wednesday, hoping their shock tactics will bring down his government.
BANGKOK — Red-shirted protesters hurled plastic bags filled with their own blood into the residential compound of Thailand’s prime minister Wednesday, hoping their shock tactics will bring down his government.
Red-shirted protesters hurled plastic bags filled with their own blood into the residential compound of Thailand’s prime minister Wednesday, hoping their shock tactics will bring down his government.
Thai protesters have hurled plastic bags filled with gallons of blood in a symbolic protest at the prime minister’s house in Bangkok.
BANGKOK (AP) — Red-shirted protesters hurled plastic bags filled with their own blood into the residential compound of Thailand’s prime minister Wednesday, hoping their shock tactics will bring down his government.
Red-shirted opposition supporters have spilt bottles of their own blood outside the entrance to the home of Abhisit Vejjajiva, the Thai prime minister, in a symbolic protest against the government.
Bangkok, Thailand (CNN) — Anti-government protesters broke through a heavy police cordon Wednesday and splattered blood on the gates of Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva’s residence.
Four of the seven news sources use the same first paragraph, word for word. The reasoning is simple, Fox News and the Huffington Post reposted the original Associated Press article. ABC has the same opening, but it has more information than the Fox News, Huffington Post and Associated Press articles. The BBC is very similar to the other four, but it is different. However, in accordance to AP Style, they’re all one sentence long. The most violent sounding introductory paragraph comes from CNN where it seems (in my opinion) to be spun to sound similar to a violent riot. Interesting how many different ways you can present protesters taking bottles/bags of their own blood and pouring it on/hurling it into the residence of Thailand’s Prime Minister.
Now, I’d like to know what you think. Should online news sources try to be as similar as possible? Should they try to write it differently than the other news sources while trying not to distort the facts? Should the reporters put their opinion somewhere in the article and designate their opinion and its political leaning? Are online news sources doing their jobs properly when they repost the Associated Press article? I want to know what you think.
Personally, I think reposting the Associated Press article is lazy, news organizations should be doing their own investigations on stories and not rely on another organization to collect their information for them.
6 Comments
Destiny in Technology · Job News
March 17th, 2010
at 7:12am
[...] Read the original post: Destiny in Technology [...]
leftystrat
March 17th, 2010
at 9:09am
Nicely done.
As for reposting the original, it seems to come down to news being a business.
Happy St. Patrick’s Day! ~ Chris Pirillo
March 17th, 2010
at 9:32pm
[...] How do popular online news sources present the same information? [...]
David Weinstock
March 18th, 2010
at 6:22am
News organizations that publish AP stories word-for-word are not being lazy. In fact, the AP is a co-op news organization. In exchange for some rather hefty fees and uploading stories from their own locales, they are granted the privilege of downloading stories written by reporters who either witnessed the event or who were located in the area and could easily secure first-hand accounts of it.
How would a newspaper, like the Des Moines Register, conduct its own investigation on a story that occurred in Bangkok? Sure, its reporters could climb on the phone, email or interview people but they wouldn’t have the source networks AP correspondents would have; whatever they produced would more likely be unverifiable accounts of whatever happened.
The advantage for AP subscribers is that the story they publish for their readers was written by a news professional who was there. It allows them to focus their resources on their true franchise: local news.
Many large news organizations used to have correspondents in cities everywhere in the world, but as the economy of the business changed, especially reduced advertising revenues (something, no doubt, you’ve experienced) caused them to pull in their horns and rely more heavily on trusted news sources like AP.
Those non-local news media who published variations on the AP story very likely either had local sources or used material they procured from another news service like Reuters or AFP
For your project, I suggest focusing on larger West Coast news media. These folks are more likely to have Asian populations/business communities that might have an interest in the region. Focus on the press of larger U.S. cities and foreign capitals, both within the region and international centers of commerce. Most have English-language versions of their news media catering to western audiences.
Here is a listing of major news organizations:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/News_agency#Commercial_services
Good luck with your project!
Brian Larkin
March 18th, 2010
at 8:22am
For a mainline conservative paper, you might try the Washington Times.
My Social Media for March 19th « ☺
March 19th, 2010
at 1:25pm
[...] Shared Destiny in Technology. [...]