Different Countries- Different News Organizations, Same Story-Different Details?

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. 

[CNN article] [Aljazeera article]

Can Facebook Make or Break Your Job Application?

         The famous social network, Facebook, was originally designed in 2004 for Harvard students to connect with each other in a digital setting.  Facebook quickly gained attention and began expanding to universities and high schools worldwide.  With the colossal expansion of this social networking site, and the rapidly improving state of technology over the past eight years, approximately 845 million people are using facebook around the globe.  The 845 million users make up over 100 billion connections.    

So, how many Facebook friends do I have?  After deleting about 100 people from my friends list, I currently have 1,188.  “1,188?” one may ask, “You have 1,188 friends?”  The answer is no, and to be honest I don’t think I know the majority of them.  I started my Facebook in the eighth grade, which, at the time, was so young it was almost taboo.  Over the past five years I’ve managed to gather over 1,000 friends, and I currently keep in contact with almost none of them. I may “like” a photo every once in a while or a friend will write on my wall, but I don’t tend to use Facebook all that often for connecting with people.  Frankly, I don’t use it much at all.  Facebook is a convenient and clever way of having an advanced online telephone book of some sorts by keeping people’s contact information so that there is the option of reconnecting or contacting someone if need be.  I would say that I am in touch with anywhere from 10 to 20 people a week.  Something helpful that Facebook offers is Facebook chat and Facebook messaging.  A group of around ten of my friends and I keep a Facebook message thread going to post lengthy information, pictures, and links.  While we usually use Twitter for addressing a large group of friends at one time, the messaging on Facebook does come in handy when we need to write more than 140 characters.  Usually I am the one being contacted on Facebook.  I do not go out of my way to write on a wall unless it’s someone’s birthday.  If someone writes on my wall, I’ll get the notification and I’ll answer them back, but I am not frequently on it, nor do I feel the need to spend hours scrolling through a random person’s Facebook pictures with whom I sat next to in Spanish in the 10^th grade.  I find sharing personal information on Facebook or writing semi-personal things on friend’s Facebook walls to be unnecessary, and I would assume that if I was friend’s with someone and they needed to talk to me, they would have my number and could just call me. 

         Facebook is a hot spot for employers to get a feel for what their prospective employee is really like, and if they would be a good match for the company.  I’ve heard too many stories about how an individual’s Facebook has held them back from getting a job because of inappropriate information and pictures posted on their page.  It is not impossible for employers to view the information that is posted online, and because of this, Facebook can be destructive for some prospective employees.
         If I were to examine my friend, Nelson’s Facebook as an employer, we notice first of all that there is no inappropriate language being used, or inappropriate videos being posted on his wall.  When we further examine it by looking at his photos, we can see that he doesn’t have any pictures suggesting he is using any illegal substances or participating in underage drinking.  Also, under his tagged pictures link, we can get a gist of what Nelson’s interests are and what he likes.  He is in an acapella group, and seemingly spends a lot of his time rowing, and with family.  From an employer’s point of view, Nelsons seems to be a well-rounded, responsible, and professional individual, and his Facebook would further compel me to consider him for a position.