Post-Election Story

After the election on Tuesday, one of the articles I found was 5 key takeaways from the 2018 midterm elections from ABC News. This news outlet is in the neutral column on the media bias chart, and I think this article supports that stance. As the headline states, the article discussed the five most significant takeaways from the election, which included how Democrats regained control of the House of Representatives and the Republicans remained in the control of the Senate. It also discussed the historical significance of the results of this election, including the new all-time high for women in the chambers of Congress and other firsts in diversity.

I think this article was good at remaining objective while still giving the most newsworthy information. I didn’t think the language was biased toward either side of the political spectrum, and I feel like I learned the most significant information about the election results from reading this article.

I was also curious to see how CNN and Fox News handled coverage of the election. On the media bias chart, CNN is between neutral and skews left, but is more toward analysis. Fox News is listed as hyper-partisan right, and is farther down than CNN on the chart, listed under “selective or incomplete story; unfair persuasion.”

I found very similar articles from both outlets about the election results that discussed the candidates who made history with their victories. However, just the difference in the headlines was interesting:

Fox News: Midterm winners make history on Election Night, from youngest woman elected to Congress to richest governor

CNN: Women and LGBT candidates make history in 2018 midterms

Both outlets highlighted women in their headlines, but Fox News mentioned the richest governor while CNN mentioned LGBT candidates. It was interesting to see how these outlets thought different people were more newsworthy. Both articles actually mentioned most of the same candidates who made history, but the one significant difference was that CNN did not mention the richest governor at all. CNN actually ended their article with a “some firsts out of reach” section that gave examples of candidates who would have made history if they hadn’t lost, which Fox did not do.

I think both articles give mostly the same information, and both seem to be written pretty objectively, but it was interesting that the writer from Fox News thought the richest governor was newsworthy and the writer from CNN did not. Although this is just one small detail, I think it shows that these two news outlets that are classified as having particular political leanings do have different decision-making processes.

Source: Post-Election Story

1 thought on “Post-Election Story

  1. I think it’s interesting that the CNN article and Fox News article both contained similar information. When people think of these news sources, they expect them to be very different, but I guess in this case, what facts were newsworthy were obvious to both news sources.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *