Sociology Syria

Sociology Syria

Isabella Ulna October 10, 2013 sociology 100 News Analysis: Syria The violence in Syria began in March of 201 1, and the Middle Eastern country has been crippled by a brutal civil war ever since. Since then, the United Nations estimates that more than 1 00,000 people have died during the ongoing clashes between President Basher AY-Sad’s government and rebel forces who want him out, and estimates that more than two million people have fled Syria to neighboring countries, most of them being children.

There has also been increasing pressure on the international community to CT after it emerged that chemical weapons were being used in the war. During this essay will analyze the differences in the portrayal Of the current political and sociological situation of the war depending on the source whose reporting it. The New York Times is an extremely liberal newspaper, which bases itself on immediate coverage of the most important issues in today’s world with “no frills. A clear example of this would be the newspapers past reporting of weeklies, where no information, no matter how controversial or damaging to the American government it was, went unreported. The New York Times has mutinously been reporting the war in Syria and has most recently emphasized the countries chemical warfare program. Given the newspapers political standpoint, it would be easy to state that the information provided in their articles will be accurate since the journalists are not “held back” by the extremity or controversy their topics may arise.

While discussing the severity of the chemical weapons the country owns, journalist Michael R. Gordon states in an editorial, “the head of the international watchdog overseeing the destruction of Syrians chemical weapons arsenal said Wednesday that a team f 15 inspectors had begun to visit sites and that the Syrian authorities had been ‘quite constructive’ and ‘cooperative. ” This is controversial given that Americans normally view Middle Eastern as terrorists and therefore, they cannot be “quite constructive” or “cooperative. An example of this American stereotype would be the fact that the new Miss America (a woman from Arab decent), was accused of being a terrorist and is called by the general public “Miss AY-Qaeda. ” During his editorial, Michael R. Gordon explicitly underlines how the Syrian civilians will be, and are affected by their countries chemical warfare program. He emphasizes the fact that the people that are most impacted by the ongoing war are the Syrian children who are becoming refugees, and are being put as active members of the militia against the government and the civilian rebel forces. Mind this quite interesting given that in almost every other article lye read outside of the New York Times, instead of emphasizing the well being of the Syrian people, they emphasize the well being of the American people with respect to Syrians current political issue. The author states that the Syrian people are “stuck in a crossfire between the opposition ND the government forces” and are simply the victims of a dyer situation their country is in.

Fox News is also an avid discusser of the subject matter; it is a conservative newspaper with history of having serious biases in their coverage of important events; such as misreporting, and failing to actually report some information about weeklies that could harm the American government. Their bias is certainly obvious in they way in which they cover such controversial problems such as Syria; in contrast to the New York Times, Fox News bases its main arguments on how the Syrian war affects Americans commerce, oil prices) and not how it affects its actual civilian population.

While comparing ;o articles about the same issue, it is almost completely evident how the differences in political standpoint change the way in which journalists report a certain subject. Fox News reported Syrians chemical warfare program as “nonnegotiable’ and “a threat to American life as we know it. ” During this editorial, the author underlines the fact that Syria is not only a threat in itself, but it is also a greater threat to the worlds economy given its proximity to the major oil producers and distributors.

The author represents the American economy and its people as the most impacted by the Syrian civil war since “the war disrupts the natural world economy and burdens tax payers with unnecessary costs” he also believes that although it burdens tax payers, the united States should become involved in the hopes that the economy will neutralize and tax payers will regain their investment in Syria.

Given that Fox News is a conservative newspaper, it caters more to the American audience who want to maintain informed about international happenings with respect to their country, and owe it affects them as taxpayers instead of catering to a more international audience. My main evidence for this assumption is that Fox News fails to underline the consequences that the Syrian war has on its civilian population, and centers its main arguments on the American economy and its taxpayers.

Another important source in the coverage of the ongoing civil war is Al- Jazzier, a Qatar-based cable news channel, which focuses more on the international aspects of conflict and not on how it affects American life. Al- Jazzier, out of all the media competitors devoted the biggest chunk of Syria overage over whether the IIS should become militarily involved in the conflicts that pits the government of Basher al-Sad against an array of rebel forces; the common message in Al-Sierra’s coverage is that the US should get involved in the conflict.

During their coverage, there is also evidence of Al-Sierra’s international roots since the channel framed more of its stories around the humanitarian crisis in the region caused by the Syrian civil war and less on the effect that the war has on the international economy, oil prices, and American taxpayers. However, one of the main differences between the previous two swappers discussed and Al-Jazzier is that the later focused almost half of its reporting on whether or not, Americans should get involved in the ongoing conflict.

Al-Jazzier spent little to almost no time reporting on the chemical weapons issue, and on refugees. I find this quite interesting given that it is a middle-eastern based newspaper trying to cater to American audiences. Although Al-Jazzier clearly represents the Syrian population as the most affected by the civil war, it fails to show why and bases its arguments solely around what will happen if America does become involved, ND what will happen if it doesn’t.

Over all, I believe the differences in political standing of the news sources clearly affect the way in which they not only report an issue but also explain who is most affected by it. The ongoing war in Syria is a clear example of how the different portrayals in the media of a single issue change the way in which the international audience views these problems. It is also evident through my research that the different media sources cater to their audience’s point of views and political stand points in order of achieving a higher rating and this way, improving their profits.

Please follow and like us:
Haven’t found the essay you want?