Is the Newspaper a form of controversy or is it simply facts...


In today's world, politics are just about everything whether it involves the economy or your personal wage at work. In today's Tribune Review, August 25, 2009, page A6 is dedicated to the president and some of the negative effects of socialism. So, now why is there a whole page dedicated to this one political topic, but, yet, there is only a small picture with a caption on the front page dedicated to the fallen Twin Towers.

Furthermore, directly below the fallen Twin Tower picture and memorial is an article about Gadhafi and his approaching date to enter the United States. It seems quite controversial to publish a memorial picture about the fallen Twin Towers, but then publish an article, that is continued in another section, about a victim that was involved in a plane incident. It seems to be quite opposite topics, but very close to what has only occurred a few years ago.

Should we ask a reader just why the Newspaper has published two articles that involve very emotional and subjective material? It makes me wonder...

According to TDS (Travel Document Systems), Gadhafi's government from Libya is said to be somewhat socialist.

It seems that these three pieces of text/pictures from the newspaper make a reader question the paper's beliefs and support. Or is it merely a method of telling the news whether it is similar or not.

Click here for the Tribune-Review web page of class.


I haven't had a chance to look at my Trib yet but your comments make me think about the bias that the newspapers of our area have. The Pittsburgh Post Gazette tends towards the more democratic side. They would be more likely to write a negative story about former President Bush than President Obama. The Tribune Review, however, tends towards the republican side. Maybe this explains why this paper seems so concerned with associating President Obamam with socialism then talking about the negative impacts of socialism.

Also, doesn't it seem counter productive to talk about 9/11, an event that had unified our country, then a few pages later tear down the president?

Angela, you bring up a great point about talking about remembering 9/11 and then discuss the negative issues of the president.

Is there an organization issue occurring here?

The article on page A6 is technically not an article but an advertisement by the U.S. Citizens Association, so the paper itself isn't exactly promoting the ideas on that page per se. None of the other articles in the paper show such a blatant bias as that ad (except, of course, for the opinion pieces), but the fact that the Trib allows such an incendiary political ad to be run does seem to suggest something about its political leanings. Especially since the opinion pieces all seem to be more on the conservative side. I don't necessarily see a problem with this; all news reports have some sort of bias, and I think the expectation with Trib readers is that you're more likely to get negative portrayals of Obama. I would have a problem if that ad was a real article, though, because there isn't even an attempt to be unbiased in that ad. Perhaps it is problematic that the word "advertisement" is only at the top of the page in very small letters, maybe leading some people to perceive it as actual news. I think that's where the real issue is.

There's no way of knowing for sure. It's all just speculation. My guess, though, is that it's just coincidental. They may have placed similar articles and pictures near one another for the sake of organization.

I think they put these ideas together for one of two reasons.

1. They were writing one article, the Twin Tower Memorial piece, and the idea for the other related one came up, so they started investigating it.

2. They wanted to capture the essence of just how important this moment is by bringing back the old feelings of patriotism that people felt following the 9/11 attacks. They do this by showing the memorial (a symbol of patriotism) adjacent to an article of terrorists (an article that brings back the anger we also felt). Combining these two emotions, the stories become more powerful than they might have been on their own. It's the psychology of the matter.

I'm not sure of the intentions for putting those two articles together, however I thought it was good on your part Derek to pick out that detail. I had read both those articles before reading your blog. As an example of a reader, when I studied the picture and then read the next article, my emotions for the Gadhafi article were a lot stronger because I felt angry towards the situation after looking at the Twin Tower picture. After reading your blog, I realized it hadn't occurred to me that these two pieces were probably placed together to form some sort of reaction from the reader. I think the effect would have happened even if the two pieces were placed in different places throughout the newspaper, although keeping them together I believe created a stronger connection and reaction.

About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by Derek Tickle published on August 25, 2009 11:20 AM.

The Grand Finale of Presentations was the previous entry in this blog.

Terror and Sickness - Topics of Dismay is the next entry in this blog.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.



Powered by Movable Type 4.23-en