The Impact of Magazine's Point of View on News Coverage
The readers of news sources like newspapers frequently rely on them for information. Therefore, it would seem to reason that the story told by two news outlets covering the same story would be consistent. Even when reporting on the same story, news organizations frequently present widely divergent perspectives. This essay aims to demonstrate how a magazine's point of view affects the viewpoints presented in the articles it publishes. It contrasts The New York Times' with The Washington Post's coverage of the Benghazi report's findings.
Differences in News Coverage by The Washington Post and The New York Times
Some of the daily newspapers published not only in America but for the entire world include The Washington Post and The New York Times. They often discuss the same issues. The Washington Post is published in Washington D.C. where it is also most widely circulated. On the other hand, The New York Times is published and widely circulated in New York. In one of the articles in The Washington Post, titled "Yes, These Very Different Headlines Are About the Same Benghazi Report" by Callum Borchers, proved how difficult it was for the media to pinpoint. The two editions had different headlines for the same news. The articles follow the different narratives that the two newspapers, The Washington Post and the New York Times published in June 2016 (Borchers, 2016).
The Washington Post's Perspective
The Washington Post is a good newspaper for political news and often depicts a liberal perspective in most of the political issues that they write in their articles. On the other hand, the New York Times, who claim to be the finest sources of news in America and by extension the world, mainly focuses on rich people's interest and bemoan poverty. In reporting this particular news, both The Washington Post and the New York Times used the same picture in their newspapers. That is the picture of a cordoned scene with an ambulance at the center of the road and officers on duty at the scene. The use of the same picture for two different narratives is striking since one would expect that since the two newspapers have different narratives for this particular issue then maybe the photos too ought to be different.
The New York Times' Perspective
In this particular instance, it was difficult for both the Washington Post and The New York Times and the general media to understand the principal significance of the findings of the report. The two newspapers are pretty accurate. However, it is the lack of a single narrative that is striking. The New York Times' narrative has a lot to do with the 2016 elections in which Hillary Clinton vied for the presidency of the United States. According to The New York Times, the final report from the House Select Committee on Benghazi found no fresh evidence of any wrongdoing or culpability by Hillary Clinton in an attack that left four Americans dead in Libya in 2012 (Herszenhorn, 2016).On the other hand, The Washington Post headlines read "Republicans Benghazi Panel Rip U.S. Response." However, its subhead reads, "report offers some new details of the attack but little scathe Clinton." While The New York Times subhead read "Republicans rebuke administration in the final report." The difference in the narratives of the two newspapers is the impact the report was to have on the 2016 elections and Hillary Clinton. The difference portrays the different viewpoints that the two newspapers and many others have on one of the well-torn stories of the United States elections of 2016.
Different Perspectives from The Washington Post and The New York Times
The Washington Post changes the general public's perception of the Libya attack that left four dead, including the U.S. ambassador to Libya, Christopher Stevens. The article indicates that the report talks much about what it claims Clinton and the other senior officials should have known and done during the systemic failure in the national security system of the administration. The Washington Post article, the writer goes ahead to say that in one of Clinton's campaign events in Denver, she stated that the committee had not found anything at all to contradict the findings of the State Department, which was at the time known as the accountability board or any other congressional inquiries (Deyoung, 2016). In this view, The Washington Post seems to be acting in support of Clinton and by extension justifying the reports which indicate that she was not involved.The New York Times points out to something that The Washington Post failed to capture all in its narrative. The New York Times states that the report gave some stinging criticism of the general delay in response and the government's lack of preparedness. This is a key point that The Washington Post too ought to have captured in their narrative, but since their perspective of the story seems to protect the government, they left this part out since it criticizes the same government. Also, The New York Times reminds the readers that before the committee formally votes to adopt the report, then it is technically a draft report rather than a final report (Herszenhorn, 2016).
References
Borchers, C. (2016, June 29). Yes, These Very Different Headlines are About the Same Benghazi Report. Retrieved from The Washington Post: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/06/29/yes-these-very-different-headlines-are-about-the-same-benghazi-report/?utm_term=.e4ee93139237
Deyoung, K. (2016, June 29). Republicans on Benghazi Panel Rip U.S. Response. Retrieved from The Washington Post.
Herszenhorn, D. M. (2016, June 28). House Benghazi Report Finds No New Evidence of Wrongdoing by Hillary Clinton. Retrieved from The New York Times: https://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/29/us/politics/hillary-clinton-benghazi.html
