The U.S has reduced their patrol of our Northern Border. They will no longer search buses, trains, and airports for illegal immigrants. The US will focus its efforts on deporting illegal immigrants who have committed crimes. Agents will still search buses, trains, and airports if they feel there is something suspicious happening.
News Sources
Associated Press
Many news sites, including Fox and MSNBC used identical articles, from the Associated Press. In the article, the AP calls the searches which are no longer taking place controversial. According to the article, this method was very efficient for the agents. The order came out at the end of September, but there were no news articles published until nearly a month later. The article states that the agents are shocked by this new order.
The Border Control has more than doubled its number of agents since 9/11, including a huge increase in the number of agents on the Northern Border Control. However, the number of arrests made has been falling. In addition, nearly all of the arrests made (97%) are made at the southern border.
People in favor of this act believe it has been a long time coming, as questioning suspicious people causes racial profiling and a violation to travelers’ civil liberties. In addition, supporters believe that agents should not be allowed to question people when there is no proof that something is wrong. Those opposed believe that the tactic that is no longer allowed was successful at catching “unlawful” immigrants. The article includes a story from Gene Davis, a retired deputy chief in the Border Patrols sector in Blaine, Washington, that tells of how one of these checks led to the arrest of Gazi Ibrahim Abu Mezer, who later tried to bomb the New York subway system. A bomb suspect was also discovered in one of these searches.
I was surprised to find the same article over and over again on the main news websites. While I know that it is common to ‘borrow’ many of the stories, I thought that this article was fairly controversial, and that each news company would put their own spin on it. The AP’s article was fairly unbiased, as far as I can see at least, but there are some arguments that could be made to support ideologies that lean either to the left or to the right. Most obviously, the topic of illegal immigration. This article states that our country will now focus on catching illegal immigrants who have committed a crime. Some (usually those leaning left) would find this perfectly fine, and be in support of the new act. However, those who believe illegal immigrants should never be allowed in our country (generally those who lean right) will disagree with this act. Because major news corporations tend to have a leaning (slight or otherwise), I was surprised to find that they did not interpret this story in their own way. Not only did they all publish an identical article, but they also did not have a follow up article that stated their stations particular beliefs about the subject.
For this reason, we decided to compare the news articles to blog posts.
Blog Posts
Before looking for blog posts covering the news article, I decided to look at the comments below MSNBC’s article. Among the comments I found one that showcased what others were afraid to say. It said, “We’re only trying to lock down this country from brown people. White people sneaking in from the north are okay!!!” As I searched for blogs covering this story, I began to see truth in their comment. I noticed what little coverage this story was getting outside of the Associated Press articles. Americans aren’t very concerned about securing the northern border. What little concerns they have are focused on Mexicans or terrorists sneaking into the U.S. through Canada. The Wall Street Journal published a quote from Border Patrol Spokeswoman, Kerry Rogers, regarding the northern border. Rogers said, “You’re not going to find Mexicans coming in through the north, generally.”
Another thing I found interesting was the type of bloggers that were covering the story. I found it extremely difficult to find any liberal or leftwing bloggers talking about the decrease in northern border control. The main group that was reporting on this issue was people from the far right. Their blog posts mostly criticized the Obama administration for “putting our country in danger” and “sympathizing with illegal immigrants”. One such case was a post on the blog goon.sayanything.com. The blogger was very blunt with his opinions and didn’t use language that beat around the bush. In his post, he said, “Looks like Obumble [Obama] and the Democrats are trying to make sure that the Border Patrol doesn’t deport their voting base.”
Once I started looking for leftwing bloggers’ opinions, my search became much more difficult. I found numerous posts about their opinions on the cruelty of the tactics used by the Border Patrol agents, but I found very few articles about the removal of these agents. This led me to believe that in the internet world, the rule “If you don’t have anything nice to say, don’t say anything at all” doesn’t apply. In fact, I feel as though the opposite is true. Nobody wants to read an article about how everything in the world is fine and dandy. If it’s not controversial or entertaining in some way, it’s not worth publishing. The same ideology holds true for all media; it needs a certain shock value.
One of the more liberal posts that I found was from canadaupdates.com. This post is fairly unbiased until the author adds two words that show their opinion. When talking about the checks at various transportation hubs, they write, “This practice was, no wonder, criticized widely by several immigrant rights groups.” With the addition of “no wonder” the author showcases his liberal opinion against the Border Patrol.
There’s something about being behind a computer that gives the bloggers a sense of courage. They aren’t afraid to bluntly share their feelings and opinions with the world. Unlike the mass media, bloggers have the freedom to say what they want, however they want. If the bloggers were in person or had wide exposure, they would likely change or censor their opinions.
Comparison
One of the most obvious differences between the two media outlets was the type of language used. The AP article used politically correct terms and facts, while the blogs used more opinionated ideas. If the AP stated anything biased, it was balanced out by the opposing argument as well. The blogs simply stated their own opinions, not worrying about how people who disagreed would react. If the AP were biased, people would not respect the article as much, and would complain. In addition, the news outlets that published the article would lose credibility. In contrast, when the bloggers are given criticism, it doesn’t affect their credibility or their future writing.
A similarity between the two news outlets is that they both use the same fact basis. There was really only one main article, used by many different news sources. The bloggers wrote their opinions based on these facts. This can show that what is published by the mass media, such as FOX and MSNBC, forms people’s beliefs and opinions. The media is controlled by the more wealth and well known companies. Without these news outlets, the bloggers wouldn’t have any facts on which to base their blogs on. On the flip side, without the bloggers and their freedom to express their opinions however they chose, society would only hear one side of the story, or just the basic facts.
People who read only articles published by major news sources only hear the facts that the outlets have deemed appropriate for them to publish. News sources emphasize the parts of stories that showcase their beliefs or opinions, which are in turn the beliefs and opinions that their readers will have. Even though it may seem that the articles are unbiased, the writers are arguing to support their beliefs. They often ignore parts of the stories that go against these beliefs.
It is clear that bloggers have more freedom to express their freedom of speech. This agency allows them to fully express how they feel, without resorting to beating around the bush. Because blogs are not an “official” new source, bloggers have the ability to be as biased as they want, without fear of being scrutinized.
Major news outlets provide seemingly unbiased facts about major news stories. These articles are meant to provide facts and get people thinking about the topics presented. People who have strong enough opinions about these topics write blogs. Blogs provide people with the same ideology as the blogger with their interpretation of the news story. They are often filled with facts supporting one side of the story, in an effort to convince readers that their opinion is the right one. Both sources of information are important when forming your own opinion on major news stories.
Links
http://goon.sayanythingblog.com/2011/10/29/us-scales-back-northern-border-checks/
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/45084559/ns/us_news-security/#.TrWMwvTiGU-
I thought it was really interesting how when you looked at the blog post and AP that they both used the same fact basis. Them both using the same fact basis surprises me because when I think of a blog post I think of it being almost like reality. It is someones personal opinion and it isn't based on facts. I also believe that it is really important for people to read these blogs because it helps someone understand the reality of what is happening instead of reading the facts that are deemed acceptable to be put into the daily news.
ReplyDeleteI also thought that it was interesting how every "major" outlet was running the same story and every blog was rehashing that same story in their own way. It seems like real hard journalism is in decline. Newspapers seem to be saying "Why hire people to do research when we can just buy someone else's?" and the bloggers are taking advantage of that and using someone else's journalism with their own editorial voice. The internet seems to be a double edge sword when it comes to journalism. It makes it so easy for anyone to be their own editor, but it also makes it so easy to just take someone else's work and make it seem like your own.
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed this post because it really does reveal what the main news sources work with. Naturally, both the blogs and the news sources are going to use the same fact base, that's why they're called facts, they can't be changed. What is surprising is that none of the different news sources put a spin on the way they were looking at the issue. With an issue like this it's far more interesting to read into the blogs and see what people are saying, but that's only if you want to go deeper into it. The AP's job is to state the facts of what's going on. All other opinions and thoughts on the subject are to be made by those reading/watching this news develop.
ReplyDelete