The "Idiots" in the White House
White House Chief of Staff John Kelly recently was accused of proclaiming Donald Trump to be an idiot, and the controversy surrounding the actuality of these claims has been covered by news sources nationally. CNN's coverage of the article included an article boasting Kelly says report he called Trump an idiot is 'total BS' a distinct and humorous contrast to Fox's article declaring that John Kelly fights report he called Trump an 'idiot,' says story is 'total BS'.
Fox's article from the start implies its stance on the event with aggressive term "fight" which presents Kelly's reaction in a negative way. In Politics and the English Language George Orwell claims that language is a "natural growth not an instrument which we shape for our own purposes" and implies that writers must question themselves in an attempt to clarify their message as much as possible. However Fox's article presents one side of the event using terms such as "emphatically denied" to correlated Kelly to their rendition; additionally Fox cites Donald Trump to affirm their opinion since he has "talked occasionally with friends about replacing him" and has "grown tired of Kelly's attitude." These phrases "give an appearance of solidarity" which further indicates the corruption in reporting and inadequacy of Fox News.
CNN similarly involved the president claiming that he denied claims- however on a different platform, and preceded to shifting the articles focus to the presidency. The article then points fingers at Trump for his poor handing of similar situations, raising questions about the Rob Porter scandal, but losing focus on the articles purpose. CNN go's on to suggest that the Trump Administration's involvement in the Porter scandal was more "dramatic" than the current issue involving John Kelly and repeats the accusation of the "unhinged" environment within the White House breaking Orwell's rule of using as minimal jargon as possible.
While both articles presented similar facts the stance of the website's is insightful in showing how the media is contributing to the 'decay of language' both socially and politically through its distracting and vague reporting.
Fox's article from the start implies its stance on the event with aggressive term "fight" which presents Kelly's reaction in a negative way. In Politics and the English Language George Orwell claims that language is a "natural growth not an instrument which we shape for our own purposes" and implies that writers must question themselves in an attempt to clarify their message as much as possible. However Fox's article presents one side of the event using terms such as "emphatically denied" to correlated Kelly to their rendition; additionally Fox cites Donald Trump to affirm their opinion since he has "talked occasionally with friends about replacing him" and has "grown tired of Kelly's attitude." These phrases "give an appearance of solidarity" which further indicates the corruption in reporting and inadequacy of Fox News.
CNN similarly involved the president claiming that he denied claims- however on a different platform, and preceded to shifting the articles focus to the presidency. The article then points fingers at Trump for his poor handing of similar situations, raising questions about the Rob Porter scandal, but losing focus on the articles purpose. CNN go's on to suggest that the Trump Administration's involvement in the Porter scandal was more "dramatic" than the current issue involving John Kelly and repeats the accusation of the "unhinged" environment within the White House breaking Orwell's rule of using as minimal jargon as possible.
While both articles presented similar facts the stance of the website's is insightful in showing how the media is contributing to the 'decay of language' both socially and politically through its distracting and vague reporting.
Why do you consider it vague reporting?
ReplyDeleteI consider it vague because it manipulates the truth. Its the consumers responsibility to ensure that where their news sources are unbiased, but unfortunately nowadays most people believe anyone who appears credentialed.
Delete