Looking at different news organizations across the world, there seems to be a dissimilarity in the way that the news is constructed and presented to the public. A U.S news organization, for instance, may cover a story about events in the middle east much different than how a middle eastern news organization would. A large reason for this, is because the audiences of the news organizations are different. When one reads CNN for example, they have to not only be informed as to the basis of the current event, but also familiarize themselves with the area, the people involved, and other information specific to the middle east that the people living there would already know.
We can examine the differences in U.S news and foreign news by reading an article about the same event on each organization's website and comparing how the story is developed and displayed to the public. In both the U.S news organization CNN and the middle eastern Aljazeera,the same event of Syrian protests and violence during a supposed four-day truce (which coincides with the Muslim holiday Eid al-Adha) between Syrian government forces and rebels is presented.
Differences between CNN article and Aljazeera Article
One immediate difference that is noticeable between the coverage by CNN and the Aljazeera is that CNN begins the story with a very brief summary of what is to be read in the article in a way that plays on the emotions of the readers. "Snipers in Damascus. Soldiers shooting protesters. Clashes outside a military camp." (CNN) This short description with blunt sentences gives the reader the intensity of the event. In the Aljazeera article, the writer goes right into the story, without a dramatic introduction or opinion. The first sentence dives right into the unbiased details of the event: "Fierce clashes between Syrian government forces and rebels have broken out…" (Aljazeera) Another difference that can be observed is that the CNN supplements the article with youtube videos to which CNN states that they cannot authenticate the footage. Because the videos cannot be specifically authenticated, it gives the reader a sense of the possibility that the article isn't 100% accurate. [Video to the right is the video linked by the CNN article] The article by Aljazeera does not give any links to videos, nor any links in which they state that they cannot authenticate the information. Since the readers of CNN are not, in general, well versed in middle eastern traditions, the article educates the reader about the holiday Eid al-Adha. This information is not important to recite in the Aljazeera version because it is well-known. The CNN version focuses part of the story on the amount of people who were killed during the protests (at least 30) and in some of the ways that these people were killed. Contrasting this, the Aljazeera version just includes a quote that says there is "fewer victims than usual". It seems that the CNN article is trying the make the protests out to look more extreme and violent than the events really are.
(Picture of Syrian protests used in the Aljazeera article)
To recap, in general the Aljazeera article is shorter and based almost entirely on facts and quotes. The CNN article is longer, includes unauthenticated videos and a more U.S interpretation of the events. Also, it educates the readers about the background for the events. (Picture of Syrian protests used in the Aljazeera article)
Which is More Trustworthy?
Personally, I trust the CNN version more because CNN seems to be a more liberal news organization that is focused mostly on getting an unbiased account of world events. The CNN article presents the information in a way as to educate the reader about the background of the events and the fighting while also presenting the specific event. Although the Aljazeera article mostly just presents facts and quotes of the event, I still trust CNN more because I am familiar with CNN and I feel like I am getting accurate information from the country in which I live. This is not to discredit Aljazeera however, because the information produced by Aljazeera was informative and factual.
Missing Information?
The CNN version speficially states that "CNN can't confirm reports of the violence as the Syrian government has severely restricted the access of international journalists" (CNN). Because of this, the readers of the CNN version are not getting completely factual and statistical information. Because the CNN article is missing the availability of their own journalists to be reporting on the Syrian protests first-hand, there is a disconnect between the event and the article. The Aljazeera article has speficic quotes from the head of the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, Rami Abdel Rahman. Rahman describes when the violence started (0730 GMT), where it started, and details involving the violence. The Syrian Observatory gave more information throughout the article on the events of the protests, while CNN did not have equal access to information.
