The same, and yet so very different

| | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)
"Thousands of Kansas Republicans filed through presidential caucuses Saturday, giving Mike Huckabee a solid chance of picking up the state despite rival candidate John McCain’s status as the presumed GOP nominee. Huckabee’s supporters came out in relatively large crowds for caucuses in Topeka and the Kansas City-area suburbs of Johnson County, and McCain’s backers appeared less numerous"

Kansas republicans flock to caucus, as candidates woo conservatives

"Kansas Republicans kicked off their caucuses this morning at 66 locations statewide, including four in Johnson County and one each in Wyandotte, Leavenworth and Douglas counties."

Kansas Republicans kick off caucuses

The first article, as you can see from the beginning, is basically a love letter to Mike Huckabee. 3/4 of the article talks about how Huckabee had more supporters and better values. While I agree that not banning abortion is horrible (McCain evidently does not support the ban) is horrible, the news is supposed to stay objective and not lean too much to one side.  Only a couple of sentences give an opposing view, those of McCain's supporters. This article makes it seem as though Huckabee's already won the election, only caring to mention in a short sentence that he has less than 200 delegates, while McCain has 700 (more than half needed for the nomination). You can definately see the reporter's bias.

The latter article was short and sweet. It was not a love letter to any one candidate, only mentioning the number of delegates each had and Mitt Romney's dropping out of the race. The other article said that Mitt Romney's dropping out of the race gave Mike Huckabee a chance of beating John McCain;  but he always has a chance because you can never know the results beforehand. Nothing is set in stone. Up until the National Conventions, everyone running has a chance.

0 TrackBacks

Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: The same, and yet so very different.

TrackBack URL for this entry: http://blogs.setonhill.edu/mt/mt_tb-awoisdlkfj.cgi/11760

1 Comments

ChrisU said:

I noticed a similar difference in the news articles I chose for this exercise--one was written with an obvious political agenda, while the other was relatively fair and balanced.

Perhaps, however, it's not that the reporters were trying to write unbalanced stories, but rather that they wanted to take a unique approach. For the article you mention, for instance, perhaps it's the fact that everyone is so certain that McCain is going to be the GOP nominee that encouraged the reporter to focus most of the article on Huckabee, the underdog.

Leave a comment


Type the characters you see in the picture above.