Pro Impeachment vs. Con Impeachment

For this media blog, I examined two articles about the current Trump impeachment process. The first article was by CNN, which was titled "House Republicans Defend Trump's Actions in New Report Responding to Impeachment Inquiry." The second article was written by The Atlantic, and it was called "Impeach Trump." Even from just reading the titles of each of the articles, it is obvious what stance each news outlet held. When reading the article from CNN, I noticed that the author created a specific tone with the goal of portraying Trump as innocent. Although the article seemed more facts-based rather than opinion, some of the adjectives used to describe Trump and the Republicans defending him had positive connotations.
I found the exact opposite from the author's language in the article from The Atlantic. The language employed in the article resulted in a dire tone that convinced readers that the impeachment of Trump is necessary. In addition, I found that when describing Trump and Republicans, the author used many words with strong negative connotations. However, the author used multiple words that were quite vague. For example, he said "The gravest danger facing the country is not a Congress that seeks to measure the president against his oath - it is a president who fails to measure up to that solemn promise." The word "fail" can have different meanings to various people. It had a negative connotation, but the author doesn't specifically describe his meaning of the word.


Articles:
The Atlantic - https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2019/03/impeachment-trump/580468/
CNN - https://www.cnn.com/2019/12/02/politics/house-republican-response-impeachment-inquiry/index.html

Comments

  1. Hey Larissa, I found it really interesting how you were able to recognize some opinion based arguments within an argument that was mainly factual. This is intriguing as it shows how no matter how hard we try to maintain a "stronger" argument like using only facts, some opinion-based ideas are inherently going to shine through. I also liked how you were able to notice the projection of a simple word (denotation-wise) like "fail." I enjoyed your media blog and good job broski! 😁👍

    ReplyDelete
  2. I thought it was really interesting how you showed that CNN portrayed Trump in a positive light, because many claim that CNN is biased against Trump and conservatives. Your analysis shows that you can't completely categorize any source of news into a specific bias, and that the different people writing articles matter just as much as the source they are writing for. Overall, I think this presents a very interesting message about how assumptions made by the general public about bias in media are not always accurate!

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Miss Representation in Curology

Ads on YouTube = Data Mining

Lovemarks Surrounding High School Musical: The Musical: The Series