One form of a media outlet we looked at was CNN. The article we looked at was titled, Doctors Urge HIV Testing Starting at 16. This article was written by Caitlin Hagan and was published on October 31, 2011. The article discussed how doctors are starting to urge HIV testing starting at the age of 16. This article includes a picture at the beginning (seen above) and is then followed by twelve paragraphs detailing what the article is about. The layout of the article makes it very easy for the reader to read because it is spaced out and doesn’t strain the reader’s eyes. The article contains 524 words supported by six different quotes from a variety of sources. The sources used in this article are American Academy of Pediatrics Dr. Jaime Martinez, an adolescent medicine specialist with Stroger Hospital of Cook County in Chicago who deals with HIV infections daily, and the Center for Disease Control. The article also primarily focuses on statistics of how HIV testing is offered to sexually active youth but they are not actually going out and getting tested. The article also provides details about how getting tested prevents teens from spreading the disease. However, there is one statistic that doesn’t support the article very well because it is not very recent. The statistic talks about how in 2006, more than 1.1 million HIV positive people living in the United States. However, one downfall to this article is that it doesn’t share the sources with the reader. The next form of media we looked at was MSNBC. Group calls for HIV screening of teens who have sex, is a news article that was published on October 31, 2011 by, Thomson Reuters. Using Health on msnbc.com as a media outlet to follow the coverage published, a 622 word news article was presented to viewers of MSNBC. Reuters states that the American Academy of Pediatrics claimed that adolescents that are sexually active and teens age 16 and older, in high risk HIV areas, should be tested for HIV. The article resulted stating the issues, that some pediatricians and doctors were uncomfortable testing such young individuals, and the costs may not be worth the screenings. The story is presented in twenty-four sentences, and six quotes used to summarize this issue. The quotes are a useful way to support the message being presented to us. The length of the article was relatively short, but was quite informative with facts. The story is also constructed with numerous lines of space between a sentence, quote, or group of two or three sentences. This can be seen as a easier for a reader or more difficult, depending on their preference. The article on msnbc.com had no use of pictures or links to other articles related to this issue to help emphasize, and draw attention to it. A source was used to write this story, http://bit.ly/cxXOG Pediatrics, and it is a reliable source on “The American Academy of Pediatrics”. There are many links within this source to articles on other health issues that may be relatively or closely related to this one.
When comparing these two articles and how they portray whether people should be tested for HIV, starting at the age of sixteen, there are many differences, but also some similarities when it comes to ideology, rhetoric, and subjectivity. In the first article there is a picture of a doctor testing blood, which is a form of ideology, and gives people something to connect with. It shows them what they will see if they get tested. By the background of the picture being blurry it focuses the attention of the reader on the doctor’s hands and what the action he is performing. We assume that the doctor is doing some form of testing with the blood, and it gives us the sense that the procedure is simple. Also by seeing the doctor wear gloves the reader can feel that the testing is safe and going to be beneficial for oneself. This view of the image is a common one that has been seen throughout our history. As a nation we assume that our medical care will be safe, fast, and simple. More times than less, individuals who visit the doctor experience situations like getting their blood tested, as we assume this photo is showing. The second article lacks a picture, however, the use of a source persuades the reader to believe the message being presented. This can be seen as use of rhetoric. An individual being able to view the source shows more dependability on what they are reading. Having something we can depend and trust, is highly valued by individuals throughout history. Another usage of rhetoric seen in both of the works is including statistics throughout them. Many of the statistics demonstrated how the number of people infected with HIV is increasing every year. This shows the urgency for citizens to get tested at an early age, and it also uses a fear factor of how it is likely to spread. Statistics have been used for many decades support or disprove theories. The presence of percentages detailing the accuracy of HIV testing is another tool of persuasion or rhetoric. The audience is also presented with a number of quotes from doctors about facts on HIV, and their personal opinion of testing at an early age. Having a higher subjects perspective on the issue gives a specific interpretation of HIV screening. Doctors are viewed as very knowledgeable people. Their opinions are highly valued therefore including these quotes persuades and comforts the reader. Incorporating the doctor’s quotes into the article can be viewed as rhetoric and subjectivity. Overall, the article from CNN and the article from MSNBC were constructed with many aspects the same. The usage of pictures, sources, statistics and quotes being presented shows the stories are well constructed and informational. In general these constructions help bring the reader to the message being shown.
The fact that ideology, rhetoric, and subjectivity are shown throughout both of these relatively short articles demonstrates that these types of classes control much of the news today. If we were to look at many other articles written throughout many other media outlets we would predict to see these and many other classes used. The outcome of our journalism project presents us with the thoughts that “leading classes” have much to do with what is posted in the news.
I really liked the way you compared the articles based on if there was a picture. I agree that a picture can tell you what to expect and give you something to connect the article with. In addition, a picture draws in readers' attention (for me at least) and makes me want to read the article. I thought this topic was interesting. I think that it is important that anyone who is sexually active gets tested for HIV, regardless of their age. I think that these articles will help spread awareness about the issue, which is very important as well.
ReplyDeleteI believe that HIV is a relatively under-represented topic, where your description of the articles was that they were relatively short. This just goes to show that there isn't much to say except that sexually active people need to make sure they are tested for HIV and are safe. I like how you two pick subjects that not only shows a difference between outlets but also creates awareness of the subject at the same time, whether teens need to be tested or not is not as important as putting the thought in the populations head. As long as it lingers they will at least have an idea or concern for their own health at all times. But as HIV is under represented, this would lead one to believe that Edward and Noam's theory possibly isn't true because many big businesses would want the population to get tested because the more people who get tested, the more money is going to go into businesses, and I don't see big time companies skipping out on any sort of profit.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteOverall I think you guys presented these articles really well. I had a chance to read both of them and believe you definitely headed in the right direction towards the thoughts of rhetoric, subjectivity, etc. Personally I think there is nothing wrong with having younger teens being tested for HIV. While you mention in your blog how doctors sometimes feel uncomfortable testing youths of this age, I think it's necessary; seeing as teens are statistically having sex younger and younger. This website (http://www.chop.edu/service/adolescent-initiative/hiv-counseling-and-testing-for-teens.html) has some information about HIV testing, and it is mainly highlighting the information for adolescents.
ReplyDeleteWe see a lot of information from different sources these days describing how these sort of tests may be morally challenging. Especially from sources that believe in a sense of abstinance until marriage' these tests will easily destroy any sense of abstinance if the results come back positive. We have see this in recent history with vaccines such as HPV vaccines. The thought of giving these vaccines to young women argues a sense of garunteed sexual activity at a young age, or before marriage. Regardless of these notions I find it irresponsible to deny such people a test that could be a deciding factor in their life.
I found another article on this topic ( http://www.medpagetoday.com/HIVAIDS/HIVAIDS/29349 ) and it again explains the necessity when it comes to testing sexually active teens, and how education needs to be enhanced for this topic. There is a picture on this article, and while the one shown above has a doctor supposedly 'testing' blood, this one shows a doctor pricking a subject and drawing the blood for testing. I think this argues a more for a feeling of reality when having this testing done. While in general it's neccessary to be tested while sexually active, the procedure can be a daunting one, especially if the results are thought to come out positive.
I liked the way you took two distinct articles and compared and contrasted both! It gave a good picture of the typical news articles, and the methods they use on the reader. Like you said, although the two articles varied slightly in how they persuaded the reader, the overall outcome was relatively the same. The use of imaging, quotes, statistics, and overall simplicity of the topics creates a sense of feeling the reader forms to the idea of getting tested for HIV. In my own experience I would say a lot of people would never even consider doing this, but after reading articles like these, the idea suddenly doesn't seem too improbable. I totally agree on the way you read the image of the first article in the sense that it gives readers that "fast, easy, safe" idea of healthcare. This mixed with the intimidating statistics, suggestive quotes from doctors, and the "its just a simple test" mentally being shown in these articles all work to convince the reader to go out and get tested. Overall I found it very interesting to read through the two outlets articles, and compare/contrast the methods they used to get younger crowds tested.
ReplyDelete