Custom Comparison of Top Three Stories from CNN and CBS News essay paper sample
Buy custom Comparison of Top Three Stories from CNN and CBS News essay paper cheap
News media have been around in the world for a long time. Even though there are new ways of finding the information, such as the Internet, people still continue using the traditional ways, such as watching news on TV. However, news that is presented nationwide, or even worldwide, might not be credible or trustworthy. News that is presented on TV could be controlled by the government, military, etc. It is often politically biased and can express only one side of the story. However, the news reporters are more educated and often have more expertise than the regular people. If their reputation is not blemished and they are accomplished in their career, people tent to trust them. Our logical thinking often depends on our knowledge, observations and background information. Media, even though often credible, under the pressure can make innocent mistakes. In order to assess how the media present their news material, two news shows were watched and compared, more particularly CNN news and CBS news. The experiment was conducted on the news presented on November 11, 2014. They both offered very similar content, emphasizing one story over the other. However, some of the information presented seemed to be not credible enough.
Both CNN and CBSN presented similar stories. However CNN emphasized more on “Iran, US, EU nuclear talks”, “Report errors by clinic that treated Joan Rivers” and “Outrage in Mexico” (Murphy, 2014), while CBSN talked about “Air legs that may help soldiers to run faster”, “Clinic failures that led to Joan River’s death” and “Chinese calling Obama “rude”” (Fager, 2014). Even though all of the stories were mentioned in both newscass, the story about Joan Rivers was similarly covered as top news. Another story was concerned with the American soldiers, yet in different ways. One channel talked about their actions in Iran, and another spoke about technological advancements implemented in the army. Finally, CNN paid more attention to the world problems, such as the outrage in Mexico (Murphy, 2014), whereas CBSN talked about Obama’s fail in China (Fager, 2014).
In order to assess if the case was a “top story”, attention was paid to the time allocated to its presentation and consideration of the news. Both CNN and CBSN, when presenting an important story, allocated around 5 to 7 minutes. They included outside speakers, videos and pictures from the events.
For the purpose of persuading their spectators concerning the credibility of the material, both TV channels used visual images. CNN and CBSN had videos that were playing while the story was told. The video depicted either Obama chewing gum during the economic summit in Beijing (Fager, 2014), or the students’ outrage in Mexico, the video of the doctor’s report for the Joan River’s story, new military technology at work, or the video of the nuclear talk meeting (Murphy, 2014). Furthermore, both newscasts invited or interviewed a credible person, who could analyze the situation from their perspective. A great example would be the interview both in CNN and CBSN with the doctor, who could analyze the report and make comments either supporting the doctors of Yorkville Endoscope Hospital or the fact that clinic failures actually killed Joan Rivers (Murphy, 2014; Fager, 2014).
However, CNN and CBSN had many differences in the way they preseented their claims. CNN was using a rhetorical force. The reporters were talking quickly, did not give many personal comments, and were mainly concentrated on the facts. They were very clear and stuck to the point. On the other hand, CBSN were presenting their claims through the emotional emphasis. They were laughing, making comments, and wishing people to get better or solve whatever problems they had. They felt more relaxed and tried to entertain the audience. Most of the information presented by CNN and CBSN did not bring any doubts, but one. When CBSN revealed the story about Obama’s and Putin’s visit to China, they referred a lot to the social media (Fager, 2014). When Putin offered his coat to the first lady of China, they interpreted it as the chance of flirting. However, my background knowledge of the Russian culture disproves the fact that Putin’s gesture was a flirt. It is not just being a gentlemen, but more being an educated Russian man who respects women. The same can be concluded when they were talking about Obama. Indeed, he had a gum, and it might not be very respectful in this particular culture. However, it is impossible to deduce whether the Chinese cared about this act. None of the spectators showed their disapproval of the footage of Obama chewing gum.
All in all, CNN and CBSN showed a high level of credibility. They used visual tools and experts to support their arguments. They allocated enough time to each story and discussed it in a very detailed manner. However, the difference observed from the two newscasts is that CBSN is more emotionally inclined, while CNN is more focused on the rhetorical force. Based on the observation, the only mistake of CBSN was building their argument on the social media, which can be very deceptive and not credible.