Category: New York Times

The editorial under consideration, entitled Haiti deals with the earthquake in Haiti and the actions taken and to be taken in order to help Haiti to overcome this tragedy. The editorial highlights the steps made by the United States Government and other American organizations to help Haitians to surmount the aftermath of the earthquake in a comprehensive and very emotional language, providing quite complete information on the topic. Due to its emotional character the editorial is very effective and achieves its main purpose to exhort the community to participate in this process, and to stress the gravity of situation in the region.

The author provides comprehensive information referring to competent sources, which makes his facts presentation convincing.

The editorial under consideration is organized very logically, providing the classic structure when statement of circumstances is followed by evidence and then conclusion (Ward 72). Thus, the author makes readers aware of the earthquake and its gravity, and after that he starts providing information on the assistance of the United States. This information is comprehensive since the author mentions definite and even very powerful people: President Obama, Hillary Clinton, and Bill Clinton, who, in authors opinion, can make a lot to assist Haitians.

The editorial highlights some of the governmental programs implemented by the people mentioned above. And all this makes the reader understand that the author possesses exhaustive information so he is quite competent to express his opinion and, which is more interesting; the authors opinion is valid and can be taken into consideration. Even more: this can make the readers feel that decision they would derive themselves, if given the opportunity and time to carefully weigh all information available will be the same with that of the author (Meltzer 89-90).

The author uses numerous linguistic means of persuasion in the editorial.

And the editorial is full of the authors opinions and conclusions, especially if we take into account Wards statement that written word is inseparable from opinion and persuasion (Ward 25). For instance, the author points out Bill Clintons values and calls him so gifted and trouble-prone, which depicts the authors positive attitude towards this person. It is necessary to point out that the main purpose of editorials is to participate in the moulding of public opinion on current affairs, and, thus, the authors need linguistic means to serve the factual evidence in as convincing a way as possible (Westin 101).

As far as the actions implemented by the government are concerned, the author insists that administration must make sure that its steps will be successful. The author uses modal verb must to reveal own opinion on what is to be done, and this opinion is enhanced with the emphatic statements, such as confusion and chaos may come into place if they fail to undertake rational and effective campaign. The editorial represents the authors point of view  first to rescue, then to rebuild. And such pieces of advice are not rare, which can be illustrated by the number of modal verbs. For instance, should is used three times, must is also used three times, and the verb need is used 6 times.

At this point Id like to mention that modals serve as overt markers of persuasion (Westin 111). It is necessary to pay attention to the numerous use of the verb need. It is the word which expresses the authors opinion on the situation in Haiti, with the help of this word repetition through the entire editorial the author tries to persuade the reader that the situation is really severe and needs assistance of the whole American society. And, actually, the author succeeds, because after the reading two thoughts stay in mind: catastrophe in Haiti, Haitians need our help.

The author uses very emotional words.

Of course, not only the significant amount of facts makes these thoughts emerge in the readers minds. The emotional impact of this editorial is the main reason for that. As mentioned above the editorial is highly emotional. The author uses such words and expressions as: the world weeps, survivors agonizing accounts, relentless poverty, tragic, catastrophe, disaster and others. Such chose of words is not sudden, of course, with the help of words mentioned above the author created the atmosphere of catastrophe and made the reader feel the gravity of those events.

The author uses numerous linguistic structures which contribute to the editorials expressiveness.

Apart from emotional words the author uses, so to say, emotional sentence structures: the earthquake did damage or had we all not seen. The use of imperative mood also contributes into evoking the readers emotions, for the author makes the readers draw their attention and make deeper sight into the Haitians despair, and even more, the author already brings the results of this observation: Look at Haiti and you will see& By means of the methods mentioned above the author, first of all, expresses his opinion about the earthquake and make the readers share this opinion. The editorial reveals catastrophic situation in Haiti with no homes, no food, and no enough medical assistance.

The author appeals to outer linguistic knowledge of readers (news on TV, photos).

The author also appeals to the different sources of information concerning the catastrophe: photos, videos. So in this manner the author makes the readers recollect those articles, news, etc., which described the whole situations with horrible visions of the disaster. So the author connects the pictures the readers already might see, with the opinion of the editorial, which will become the readers own opinion. And the reader is persuaded to assist those people by presenting inspiring initiatives of the government and other organizations. The author also stipulates that the United States has a special responsibility to provide assistance to its neighbor. So the readers are already convinced in that and are ready to donate, or exhort others to help, or, at least, to make ones own opinion which coincides with the authors opinion.

The editorial is counted on the whole society.

Another very important thing to be considered is the audience which the author wants to affect by the editorial. And here the audience is very wide, the author appeals to different people and organizations: private citizens and charitable organizations. But, of course, the main target group is private citizens. Moreover, the author directly points out the ways how American people can help, mentioning charitable organizations and humanitarian aid. And this conclusion is not only based on the hints in the editorial. The whole language of the editorial is simple and understandable by everyone, without using some specific terminology.

And the main goal of the editorial is to reach peoples hearts and exhort them to assist Haitians. And the end of the editorial is very remarkable since here the author expresses his opinion about the necessity to help Haitians not only with surmounting of the earthquake aftermaths, but also to assist in the building of a strong state which will not face such grave problems in future. And this opinion is expressed by means of the imperative mood and quite emotional words: generations of misrule, political strife, suffering forever, Haitians do not need condolences, the ability to help themselves.

The main idea of necessity to provide assistance to Haitians is transparently revealed with the help of different linguistic and non-linguistic means.

And, finally, it is necessary to consider the purpose of the editorial which lies on the surface. The author expresses his opinion of necessity to assist Haiti. This is the main idea and the theme of the editorial under consideration. This statement can be proved, first of all, by the numerous uses of the corresponding words. Thus the word help is used 5 times, the word aid 3 times, the assistance was also used once, and it is necessary to add that the word commitment (which reveals the idea of assistance here) was used twice.

Another way to persuade the readers in the necessity of assistance used in the editorial is highly emotional depiction of the catastrophe aftermaths. The examples of the emotional words and structures used in the editorial are mentioned above. And, of course, the author uses the examples of governmental aid, which is to make the reader think, that American government does a lot for saving and assisting Haitians, different organizations also participate, and even private citizens can help, so why not to help as well.

The main purpose of editorials to persuade is achieved due to the emotional character and comprehensive information provided in the editorial under consideration.

Moreover, being editorial it reveals the authors opinion which also affects the readers. The author expresses his ideas strictly and very personally, which makes them sound more akin with the readers own ideas. So the purpose of the editorial is achieved, and the author reaches all his aims: to express his views on the necessity to help and to show the ways in which this help can be provided. Thus, it is possible to conclude that the editorial under consideration achieves its purpose due to the use of such means as: logic structure, comprehensive information, use of modals and imperative mood, emotional language. It is also necessary to add that the editorial under consideration can be considered as a successful one, since it reveals the authors opinion transparently and it also likely to make the readers share this opinion.

Works Cited

Meltzer, K. Newspaper Editorial Boards And The Practice Of Endorsing Candidates For Political Office In The United States. Journalism 8 (2007): 83-103.

Haiti. New York Times 2010: A36.

Ward, B.G. The Student Journalist And Writing Editorials. New York: Richards Rosen Press, 1969.

Westin, I. Language Change In English Newspaper Editorials. New York: Rodopi, 2002.

Just hours after the end of the midterm elections, President Trump asked Attorney General, Jeff Sessions to resign. Trump had been toying with the idea of firing Sessions since he recused himself from the Russian investigation but found that doing so would only add fire to the flames of suspicion from the public and Congress. As a result, Trump took it upon himself to publically humiliate, undermine and discredit Sessions at his rallies, on his twitter and even in interviews with large media channels. However, after some thought Trump and his administration find a date they can fire Sessions: after the midterms. They see this as a natural time to fire anyone in the cabinet as it is halfway through the term and any President may be inclined to make staff changes so Trump calls for Session to resign from the cabinet effective immediately. With the Russian investigation heating up it is evident that the President is desperate to regain control and firing Sessions and naming a new Attorney General that will help turn the investigation in his favor. I have chosen three stories that discuss the firing (or resigning) of Jeff Sessions; one from the New York Times titled, a story by CNN and the last coverage I chose is from National Public Radio. I chose these three media sources because they represent a print media, a news channel (TV) media, and the radio. This will allow me to analyze the differences of coverage across media types as well as slight media bias based on channel. I believe that there will be a correlation between these pieces that is critical of the President’s decision but the rhetoric they use, frame they take and audience appeal to will be different due to their different publication type and different key audiences.

The New York Times article titled, “Jeff Sessions is Forced Out as Attorney General as Trump Installs Loyalist” takes a quick stance on the issue. I chose to find an article on the event from the New York Times due to their international relevance and credibility despite overall decline of print media (Troise and Durbin 2018). The “New York Times” effect is the idea that most publications on a local, state, national and international level look to the New York Times for their stories and information. If the New York Times reports something it is more than likely deemed credible and will be seen in other papers across the world (Rossi).

In the article they first identify whomever the successor may be as a “loyalist” whose beliefs on the special investigation align with those of the President. Then they name the acting Attorney General and give some background. Matthew Whitaker is a one-time Senate candidate and who published an op-ed in CNN questioning the reach of the special investigation. The article is definitely taking an informative stance on the events that unfold with the firing and reassignment of the case but I think they also give a slight slant to it. By presenting Whitaker first as a Trump “loyalist” even before reporting his name they have seemingly tried to discredit him. This is where their informative coverage comes off as more of a “watchdog” of democracy. After the initial shade of bias the article does return to its informative role. They describe the Democratic party’s reaction to the new appointment and what it would mean for the justice department if Whitaker doesn’t recuse himself as well. They explain that the ethics committee could get involved and how both Republican and Democratic representatives are reacting to the change in staff and its timing. They reference quotes from Republican senators like Lindsey Graham who had previously been against the firing of Sessions and are now onboard. As well as Adam Schiff of California calling the move a “constitutional crisis.” The New York Times is usually an objective media source, in my opinion. There is some obvious demographic bias based on the fact the paper is located in a massive metropolitan area which can contribute to the types of views and opinions that the authors might have but other than in opinion columns, bias is relatively mitigated. The writing style is to the point and that is evident in this piece. The author provides a bit of insight into what the repercussions of this decision could be so that provides an interpretative aspect but it generally informs the reader of the event and its significance.

The CNN story on their website discusses the event in an attempt to inform but slightly more on the watchdog side of the issue. CNN as new outlet is known to be a left-wing national new broadcast. With the sensationalization of our politics CNN has seemed to be one of the most sensationalized broadcasts of them all. It has become more and more left-leaning as its counterpart Fox has become more and more right-leaning. CNN takes a usual stance against President Trump which is consistent in their report on the resignation of Sessions. The title is a quip “Jeff Sessions out as Attorney General” is just the beginning of their brevity and slant of bias. With sentences like “Sessions received the request to resign from Kelly, not the President, on Wednesday morning, an administration official said,” are slight digs at the professionalism of the way the situation was handled. It also highlights the squabbles that Sessions and Trump had over the near two years he was Attorney General.

CNN is good at reporting relevant stories but they don’t have an affinity to be objective. They tend to only contribute to polarized feelings by painting stories in a left-leaning light and rarely providing an opposing point of view. Objectivity is essential to good journalism- to an extent, in my opinion, after sharing the facts clearly I think its important to shine light on the issue and explain the implications. However, CNN can take this to an apocalyptic level causing panic in its viewers. In this article I don’t think they push it to quite the apocalyptic end but they do make it clear what their opinion is of Sessions, the President, Whitaker, Republicans and the situation as a whole. Their coverage differs from the New York Times article because it does share their opinion in a much more obvious light. Aside from the written piece the video at the top of the article is an extensive dive into Jeff Sessions background which paints him as a racist Trump Supporter and fails to highlight other positive aspects until the end when they point out his sense of duty to his job regardless of Trump’s attitude. It also differs from the New York Times article by highlighting tweets throughout this specific coverage. The headers: “Jeff Sessions out as Attorney General”, “Trump constantly criticizes Sessions”, “Democrats demand continued independence for Mueller”, and “Immigration bonded him with Trump from the start” all seem to point to one side of the story. The article fleshes out these standpoints but fails, like the video, to address the opposing side of the argument or what a similar event from another administration would have looked like.

The lack of clear objectivity is mitigated well in coverage done by National Public Radio. In a radio episode on November 7th called “Jeff Sessions forced out as Attorney General after constant criticism from Trump” they cover the forced resignation of Sessions. Using audio clips from their host as well as clips from Trump interviews berating Sessions in the beginning of the episode they set up a clear argument. Trump was displeased with Sessions for recusing himself, tension grows, he finds his opportunity and asks for the resignation. Early on in the episode we have the clear facts of the situation given to us as well as some background on the issue. NPR as a whole is known for being a trustworthy news source that doesn’t report “fake news.” Its role as a media outlet is definitely well facilitated by the fact that it is a public platform and doesn thave to achieve private rate incentives but it does still struggle for funding. As a result of their public status though they are much less inclined to give into the entertainment aspect that helps push our media so far into sensationalism.

There really isn’t much of a frame to discuss with this report of the incident because they are generally objective but there is always some way to view an issue. The NPR episode definitely frames it as a n issue that should incite thoughtfulness for what is to come with the Russian investigation and the motives behind the forced resignation. They are coming down as a watch dog but on a much more informative side as the other two sources I have mentioned. This is to be expected if you know much about the private and public media sectors. Obviously the public media receive government funding and wouldn’t want to cause issues regarding a republican decision with a republican controlled government.

As far as objectivity I think that NPR holds true to that goal. They have a section describing Sessions achievements and what he has accomplished as Attorney General, calling him “one of the most successful cabinet members in the Trump Administration” in regards to his ability to push the Trump immigration agenda and other new policies. They explain how he led the Trump agenda to lower crime rates and reference what he claims responsibility for in his resignation letter. This provides a clearer look into the opposing side of the story- and event he opposing side of the issue in general. Instead of just hearing that Trump forced his resignation and linking the letter they provide details of his work and reasons he may not have been failing to complete his duties in actuality. They tend to leave the comments that insinuate consequence to the guests on the show but even still they cover the facts and if they go to far outside of being objective they try to rein them back in. They too use subheadings to describe what aspects of the coverage they will be spearheading throughout the attached article but they too are more representative of the entire issue than just one side unlike CNN’s subheadings.

I chose to highlight a newspaper, television, and radio media’s coverage of the Jeff Sessions resignation because all three publications bring something new to the table. The three types reach different audiences of different ages on a local, state, national and international level without looking at how impactful these specific publications are. Analyzing how the New York Times, CNN, and NPR report the same story provides interesting insight into where bias among citizens can come from. Certain age groups, genders, and social classes have access to these different media but do they always consume it? If so which are they more likely to consume? Will they cross reference their sources to be sure they are getting clear information? Unfortunately, it isn’t likely that someone who watches CNN is crossing it with Fox or CBS. Someone who regularly reads the New York Times might also consume television media but it is not likely that they tune into NPR or other radio stations on a consistent basis. It is interesting to note that the publication perceived to be the most objective is also probably the least consumed outlet of the three. American citizens like the entertainment aspect of broadcast media and it is easy for them to consume nowadays especially with social media. The New York Times has an international effect and is widely respected as a publication with objective journalism with a slight slant of insight towards being a watchdog. CNN is a known liberal television media source with private revenue who has to incentivize their viewers to watch by adding in that sensationalized entertainment that can cause mass panic. NPR is a great option that is widely accessible and provides an informative view of the relevant issues our country faces today with limited bias as it is a public media source.

Each of these platforms reaches millions of people and each of these platforms takes its own approach in reporting the Jeff Sessions story. Noting these differences and looking for them in future can help the viewer/reader/listener pick up on bias and break through the insight to find the facts and in turn form their own opinion.

Works Cited

1. Troise and Durbin 2018
2. Baker, P., Benner, K., & Michael. (2018, November 07). Jeff Sessions Is Forced Out as Attorney General as Trump Installs Loyalist. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/07/us/politics/sessions-resigns.html
3. Jarrett, L., & Watkins, E. (2018, November 08). Jeff Sessions out as attorney general. Retrieved November 11, 2018, from https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/07/politics/sessions-resign/index.html
4. Johnson, C. (2018, November 07). Jeff Sessions Forced Out As Attorney General After Constant Criticism From Trump. Retrieved November 11, 2018, from https://www.npr.org/2018/11/07/539109386/jeff-sessions-out-as-attorney-general-after-steady-drumbeat-of-criticism-from-tr
5. Rossi, A. (Director). (2011, September 29). Page one – Inside the New York Times[Video file]. Retrieved from https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1787777/

Muslims have been faced with stereotypes since the 7th century AD or the Byzantine Empire era. But what started and continued the stereotype has been through the usage of media. Whether it be in the form of a movie, T.V. shows, or news, the concept of presenting Muslims as terrorists has existed for decades. However, today, some media reinforces, challenges or equally challenges and reinforces this stereotype. And one of the media that equally reinforces and challenges this stereotype is The New York Times. The New York Times, originally, The New York Daily Times was founded by two people: Henry Jarvis Raymond, a journalist and politician, and George Jones, a former banker, on September 18, 1851(David 3). In 1857, the start of the Civil War, “the ‘Daily’ had been dropped from the title (David 46). Since then, The New York Times had won “2 Pulitzers, bringing its total wins to 127” (The New York Times Company). After observing five articles of The New York Times, I have found that the stereotype, of Muslims are Terrorists seems to be both equally reinforced and challenged to different degrees. This is shown through articles regarding events on Muslims.

From the past 5 weeks of researching my stereotype through 5 different articles in The New York Times, it can be seen that The New York Times equally reinforces, and challenges Muslims are terrorist stereotypes through the different events regarding Muslims. The articles that reinforced the idea that Muslims are terrorist are ‘A DAY OF TERROR: THE TIES; In U.S., Echoes of Rift Of Muslims and Jews’ by Laurie Goodstein, ‘A DAY OF TERROR: THE MILITANT; America the Vulnerable Meets a Ruthless Enemy’ by John F. Burns., and “In Paris Knife Attack, Police Ask How They Missed a Killer in Their Midst” by Adam Nossiter. From these articles, it can be shown that the reinforcement of the stereotype is through events regarding attacks conducted by Muslims. The first two articles, ‘A DAY OF TERROR: THE TIES; In U.S., Echoes of Rift Of Muslims and Jews’ by Laurie Goodstein and ‘A DAY OF TERROR: THE MILITANT; America the Vulnerable Meets a Ruthless Enemy’ by John F. Burns., shows the aftermath of the four coordinated terrorist attacks by the Islamic terrorist group. In the article ‘A DAY OF TERROR: THE TIES; In U.S., Echoes of Rift Of Muslims and Jews’ by Laurie Goodstein, a national religion correspondent for The New York Times, Goodstein stated that the Muslims community has been targeted by people around the world. Some examples of this are stated in the article, “Muslim women in headscarves are advised to stay indoors. Mosques and Muslim schools in Los Angeles were shut down, and Muslim leaders in Michigan and other states reported receiving telephone threats” (Goodstein). This shows that with the event of 9/11, people’s belief of Muslims being terrorists is being reinforced and getting stronger with every event. In addition to this article, the article ‘A DAY OF TERROR: THE MILITANT; America the Vulnerable Meets a Ruthless Enemy’ by John F. Burns., a Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist, also reinforces this belief. In Burns’ article, it is shown that Burns is trying to incite fear towards the reader. For example, in his article, Burns stated: “On the tape, Mr. bin Laden read a chilling poem with themes that have a powerful resonance among Muslims with the grievances against America.” This shows that Burns is trying to make readers subconsciously associate the Muslim community to Bin Laden by using the phrase “resonance among Muslims” (Burns). Last but not least, the event of the Paris knife attack also reinforces the idea of Muslims being terrorists. In the article “In Paris Knife Attack, Police Ask How They Missed a Killer in Their Midst” by Adam Nossiter, a Paris bureau chief at The New York Times, Nossiter stated that Mickaël H., an Islam converter, had murdered 4 people by stabbing (Nossiter). This incident reinforces the idea of Islam being a dangerous religion by using Mickaël H. as evidence. Although all these articles show the reinforcement of the idea of Muslims as terrorists, there are also articles that challenge this idea.

The article that challenges this idea is ‘The Muslims Are Coming’ by Wajahat Ali, and ‘Mar-a-Lago Won’t Host Anti-Muslim Group’s Gala, Trump Organization Says’ by Mariel Padilla. Both of these articles challenge this idea by presenting Muslims as people that are not a threat to our country. For example, in the article ‘The Muslims Are Coming’ by Wajahat Ali, a New York Times contributing op-ed writer, Ali explains the influx of Muslims coming to America and running for political positions in the U.S. Wajahat. Ali also explains that this influx of Muslims had led people to be feared. This is shown in the article when Ali stated,

‘for some Americans — those who support a travel ban, a wall along the Mexican border and increased restrictions on refugees, all while holding on to the ridiculous belief that the world’s 1.8 billion Muslim hate America, despite the fact that it’s home to nearly 3.5 million of us — that statement probably inspires fear’ (Ali).

However, this fear have also caused many Muslims to enter the political position because they want ‘people [to] recognize I am someone who is a public servant working to create a better society, who just happens to be a Muslim refugee’ stated by Ms. Omar a member of U.S. House of Representative from Minnesota (Ali). This article shows that there are still people that believe that Muslims who are coming into the U.S. are terrorists and should be kicked out, and because of this fact, many Muslims are stepping out and running for political positions around the U.S. some include Rashida Tlaib of Detroit, a former state representative and a daughter of Palestinian immigrants, and Ilhan Omar, a Somali-American and refugee from Kenya.

In addition to this article, the article ‘Mar-a-Lago Won’t Host Anti-Muslim Group’s Gala, Trump Organization Says’ by Mariel Padilla, a reporter based in New York, shows the Anti-Muslim Group, ACT for America, being denied access to hold their annual gala at Mar-a-Logo. This shows that one of the largest Anti-Muslim group that is known for its history of “Islamophobia and associations with white supremacist and racist organizations” being rejected, proves to show that people are starting to believe that not all Muslims are terrorists (Padilla).

Although these past 5 weeks of analyzing 5 articles regarding The New York Times is not a large sample, it is enough to present an argument arguing The New York Times reinforcing and challenging the stereotype of Muslim are terrorists. However, future research will need to be conducted to solidify this argument.

Work Cited

1. Ali, Wajahat. “The Muslims Are Coming.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 30 Oct. 2018, https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/30/opinion/election-muslim-candidates-politics.html?searchResultPosition=11. Accessed Date 14 Oct. 2019.
2. Burns, John F. “America the Vulnerable Meets a Ruthless Enemy.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 12 Sept. 2001, https://www.nytimes.com/2001/09/12/us/a-day-of-terror-the-militant-america-the-vulnerable-meets-a-ruthless-enemy.html. Accessed Date 23 Sept. 2019.
3. Davis, Elmer. History of The New York Times 1851-1921. The New York Times, 1921. Accessed Date 28 Oct. 2019
4. Goodstein, Laurie. “In U.S., Echoes of Rift Of Muslims and Jews.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 12 Sept. 2001, https://www.nytimes.com/2001/09/12/us/a-day-of-terror-the-ties-in-us-echoes-of-rift-of-muslims-and-jews.html. Accessed Date 23 Sept. 2019.
5. Nossiter, Adam. “In Paris Knife Attack, Police Ask How They Missed a Killer in Their Midst.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 5 Oct. 2019, https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/05/world/europe/paris-knife-attack.html?module=inline. Accessed Date 21 Oct. 2019.
6. “Our Journalism.” The New York Times Company, 3 May 2019, https://www.nytco.com/press/our-journalism/. Accessed Date 28 Oct. 2019.
7. Padilla, Mariel. “Mar-a-Lago Won’t Host Anti-Muslim Group’s Gala, Trump Organization Says.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 6 Oct. 2019, https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/05/us/anti-muslim-mar-a-lago.html?searchResultPosition=1. Accessed Date 10 Oct. 2019.
8. Wright, Robert. “Islamophobia and Homophobia.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 27 Oct. 2010, https://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/10/26/islamophobia-and-homophobia/?searchResultPosition=3. Accessed Date 4 Oct. 2019.

Introduction

The abuse of power has been a long discussed topic. Harvey Weinstein currently 66 years old, previous CEO of the Weinstein production company was accused of sexual assault and sexual harassment after decades of allegations. According to the BBC news and website, his actions were made public after an article was published by the New York Times “detailing decades of allegations of sexual harassment against Harvey Weinstein…Among the accusations are that he forced women to massage him and watch him naked. He also promised to help advance their careers in return for sexual favors”. This paper analyses the articles by the New York Times and the New Yorker detailing the accusations and its effects that it had on empowering women to come forward about their harassers mostly under the hashtag #MeToo. I will also discuss how the #MeToo movement was created in 2006 by Tarana Burke which helped give a voice to women who survived sexual violence, helped take down Harvey Weinstein and other men in power who use their position to harass female employees and coworkers. This paper will also focus on the allegations that Harvey Weinstein faces and his response, the creation of the Me-Too movement which empowered women to help fight sexual harassment and violence in the workplace, and non-disclosure agreement used by the likes of Harvey Weinstein to abuse their victims.

The New York Times published a story on October 5th 2017 detailing decades of allegations against Harvey Weinstein, two women came to the newspaper to share their stories. The first woman Ashley Judd claims that she was expecting to have a breakfast business meeting with Harvey but was instead sent to his room where he appeared in a bathrobe and asked if she could massage him or watch him shower. The other, Emily Nestor who was working for one day as a temporary employee, claims that Harvey invited her to the same hotel and offered to help boost her career in exchange of sexual advances. These aren’t the only women that have the same narrative against Harvey Weinstein, there is a consistency where plenty of other women who claim that they were invited to what they thought was a meeting or party at first, but were surprised to be sent to his room where he appeared in a bathrobe and asked for a massage, he would often ask women to watch him shower, masturbate in front of them, grab them and forced them to do sexual acts even if they don’t give consent. All the women that came forward say that they have said “no” many times but he would still force himself onto them, they claim that he is intimidating, big, fat, and most importantly have a lot of power over their careers. Some female employees that used to work at his company claim that they were removed from project, fired, or faced some damage in their careers after declining Harvey’s sexual favors. According to the New York times, Harvey Weinstein reached a settlement with at least eight women where he was accused of sexual harassment and unwanted physical contact. In 2015, According to the New Yorker, Harvey Weinstein met with Ambra Battilana Gutierrez who was 22 years old and was a finalist in Miss Italy modelling contest at a party where he complimented her and sent a letter to her agency the next day asking for a meeting with her. She gathered her portfolio and went to a private meeting with him, she claims that he was looking at her breast and made a comment asking if they were real, he then grabbed her breasts. She claims to have felt petrified and went to the New York Police Department’s Special Victims Division where they gave her a wire and asked her to meet with Harvey again in order to catch him on tape for harassment, because he had given her tickets to “Finding Neverland” which is a musical that he was producing. The next day, she went and met with Harvey at a bar while the police were giving her instructions, at the end he asked her to join him to his bedroom but she stood in the hallway and asked him why he grabbed her breasts the other day? To which he replies. “Oh, please, I’m sorry, just come on in,” Weinstein says. “I’m used to that. Come on. Please.” “You’re used to that?” Gutierrez asks, sounding incredulous. “Yes,” Weinstein says. He adds, “I won’t do it again.” The conversation is currently online and available to the public but still the D.A’s office didn’t prosecute him then. One of the reasons is that Harvey Weinstein has an impressive legal team according to Asia Argento, an actress who also claims to have been harassed by Harvey. She claims that they had a project together and was asked by one of the producers to come at a party, but she entered to a hotel room to only find Harvey Weinstein. Yet again, he had a bathrobe on and gave her lotion in order to massage him, after starting to massage him, he grabbed her skirt up and performed oral sex to her even if she repeatedly said “no”. She claims to have surrendered because he was terrifying and had a lot of clout over her. She later on became a movie director and released a movie called “Scarlet Diva” in 2000, one of the scenes contain a man luring her to a hotel and asking her to give him a massage. A lot of people made the connection and sympathized with her. There are still countless other allegations with almost the same narrative, Lisa bloom who is a lawyer advising for Harvey said in a statement that “he denies many of the accusations as patently false.” According to Mark Gill, former president of Miramax which is one of Weinstein’s company, claims that former and current employees whether assistant or executives knew about Harvey’s misconduct but only few ever confronted him.

According to the guardian news website, the stories that the New York Times and the New Yorker published prompted thousands of women to come forward with their accounts of sexual harassment and assault against a wide variety of perpetrators under the hashtag #MeToo. One of the reasons that the Harvey Weinstein case made headlines was that countless women published their stories under the hashtags and made national buzz. The movement had an impact on the industry where dozens of men were fired or resigned from their positions, it has inspired women to speak up against their harassers from all across the globe. It has created a community where women could share their sexual assault stories, it even started the conversation about sexual violence and raised attention on laws used by companies to hide these misbehaviors in non-disclosure agreements. Non-disclosure agreements are used by harassers like Harvey Weinstein to harass multiple victims. They are mostly used when transformed to a settlement where Harvey pays his victims for compensation and for their silence against claims of sexual assault.

According to the MeToo official website, the movement was first created back in 2006 by Tarana Burke, the purpose was to help black women and girls from low wealth communities. Their vision is to create facilities where survivors can find healing, also find brave women to speak up in the name of the movement to empower other girls who fear the society view.

The work of Tarana can be linked to hooks, where particularly black women were oppressed and faced issues with race, so both hooks and Tarana faced issues with race and gender from particularly white men. They used the help of first world feminism to help other who’s voice isn’t loud enough. According to Deborah Tannen, the male figure is unmarked and the female is marked, this is to show that most of the times women face sexual assault because they catch the attention of men, the male gaze. Also, according to Cirkensena and Cuklanz, Women are being perceived to be more body than mind and more as objects than subjects.

Shockingly, The New York Times says that many women praise Harvey in the workplace, they claim to have not experience any sort of harassment, he is respected by many claiming that he helped a lot of people and gave great advices with no sight of trouble. However, other employees in interviews raise one common question: how did Harvey Weinstein pail allegations during these last three decades? having multiple women come some at the same hotel and having a pattern of harassment which wasn’t raised until now.

The reason is that “It wasn’t a secret to the inner circle,” said Kathy DeClesis, Bob Weinstein’s assistant in the early 1990s. She witnessed a young woman coming out of Harvey’s company after having an encounter with him and later on receiving a settlement from him, according to several employees.

According to the BBC news, Weinstein issued an apology recognizing that he’s actions “has caused a lot of pain and I sincerely apologize for it”. Still, he disputes the allegations saying he harassed female employees over the three decades. According to the New Yorker, Weinstein had an interview with the New York Post saying “I’ve got to deal with my personality, I’ve got to work on my temper, I have got to dig deep. I know a lot of people would like me to go into a facility, and I may well just do that—I will go anywhere I can learn more about myself.” He also claims that he was giving compliments to people that mistook it as being sexual, he is working to channel his anger and claims that he won’t do it again.

It was too late for Harvey Weinstein, because of the allegations and the articles published by both the New York Times and New Yorker. The BBC says that after the allegations Harvey took a leave of absence from his company and later been sacked from the company’s board. After more allegations started pouring and Hollywood A-listers started claiming they were harassed by Weinstein, many important organizations removed ties with him. Like the Bafta, the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences who are behind the Oscars along with other major organizations. Many companies that he had business with removed their deals, and according to the BBC, the Weinstein company had a deal for a possibility to sell that failed through.

It was clear that Harvey’s actions had severe consequences on both him and his company, Since the recording that was taken of him with Gutierrez, the miss Italy finalist, law enforcement agents could have accused Harvey of sexual abuse in the third degree which is punishable by law by a maximum of three months in jail. However, according to the New Yorker, Gutierrez past started to appear on the tabloids where she witnessed a bribe a got involved in a case that is still ongoing. Another case before it, she accused an Italian businessman of sexual assault but later denied to corporate with the authorities. Therefore, the police hesitated to prosecute Harvey even if they had enough evidence about him, because of Gutierrez statements in the past which complicated the case for the Manhattan District Attorney. Ultimately, they decided to not file charges.

Based on multiple sources, most women that are harassed by Harvey Weinstein, their ages range between 20 and 40, when their asked why haven’t you charged him in the past, most say that they were no witnesses and that Harvey’s presence alone terrified them, he also had the power to tarnish their careers.

2 years after this incident with Gutierrez, the articles from the New York Times and News and New Yorkers came out unveiling multiple allegations mentioned above, according to the Guardian, Harvey Weinstein is set to face trial in January 2020 after multiple allegations of rape and sexual assault to which he pleads not guilty. More than 80 Women have since alleged Harvey of sexual misconduct for a period of four decades.

Harvey Weinstein have caused a lot of pain for a lot of women, the allegations that he faced have caused him his career and his high status in Hollywood. This Weinstein case gained national attention, and created an effect where multiple men in Hollywood resigned or got fired because of sexual harassment allegations. This event empowered other women to share their stories of sexual assault with the hashtag #MeToo. It also caused national awareness about how the U.S deals with sexual misconduct in the workplace and the use of power, which Weinstein has in the film industry and his strong connections, to discourage his victims from pursuing legal charges and use non-disclosure on employees to not risk accusations. The New York Times and New Yorker are responsible for raising awareness about sexual abuse and empowering other women to stand up and face their harassers.

References:

1. Kantor, Jodi, and Megan Twohey. “Harvey Weinstein Paid Off Sexual Harassment Accusers for Decades.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 5 Oct. 2017, https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/05/us/harvey-weinstein-harassment-allegations.html.
2. Gupta, Alisha Haridasani. “Weinstein’s Accusers Near a $25 Million Settlement. He Pays the Victims Zero.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 13 Dec. 2019, https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/13/us/weinstein-sexual-misconduct-settlement.html.
3. Farrow, Ronan. “From Aggressive Overtures to Sexual Assault: Harvey Weinstein’s Accusers Tell Their Stories.” The New Yorker, The New Yorker, 22 Aug. 2019, https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/from-aggressive-overtures-to-sexual-assault-harvey-weinsteins-accusers-tell-their-stories.
4. “Harvey Weinstein Timeline: How the Scandal Unfolded.” BBC News, BBC, 12 Dec. 2019, https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-41594672.
5. Perraudin, Frances. “#MeToo Two Years on: Weinstein Allegations ‘Tip of Iceberg’, Say Accusers.” The Guardian, Guardian News and Media, 14 Oct. 2019, https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/oct/14/metoo-two-years-weinstein-allegations-tip-of-iceberg-accusers-zelda-perkins-rosanna-arquette.
6. Me Too Movement, https://metoomvmt.org/about/.

This paper explores the events that happened on the 5^th of September in 1994. The research of the New York Times archives revealed three particularly worrying articles. All of them described murders and injuries of three different people, and all of them had one feature in common – the suspects charged with murders were under age.

The first article follows the case of an argument between two friends which had a lethal outcome, one of the boys shot the other one. The second article is a description of a tragic accident that happened between two cousins one of which found a gun and, thinking, it was a toy, shot his cousin. Finally, the last article depicts a cold-blooded planned murder of an elderly woman by a teenager.

The article called “Mischievous Boys, a Stolen Gun and the Loss of a Life” by Robert D. McFadden discusses a tragic result of a fight between two friends of 13 and 11 years old. The older child, Adam, was “a troubled boy from a broken home, a blusterer with a wiry arm who befriended younger, smaller boys he could dominate” (McFadden par. 1).

The younger friend, Jacob, is described as a quiet, shy and police child, who was the follower in this boyhood relationship. A while before the tragic fight the two boys together with a couple more teenage friends committed a planned mischief together, they broke in to some private property and stole a number of things among which there were guns.

Days after that, when the four children gathered for a game, a fight occurred. Jacob fought with one of the boys, called Jamie. As a leader of the group, Adam broke the fight off, telling Jamie to apologize, which he did. Jacob was ordered to give an apology too, yet, he refused; to maintain his authority, Adam pointed a gun at his younger peer’s chest and ordered once again, Jacob kept refusing and Adam pulled the trigger.

Shocked, screaming and bleeding, the 11-year old ran out of the house, where he collapsed and was found by a construction worker, who called 911 (McFadden par. 29). Jacob was picked up by a helicopter and moved to the hospital, but did not survive; the murderer called the police and surrendered the same day.

The next article is by John T. McQuiston and it is called “In a ‘Game,’ Boy Shoots His Cousin Handgun Seemed Just Like a Toy”, this piece informs about a bad accident that happened when two cousins, an 8-year old Kashif and a 3-year old Lorenzo were left alone in a room with a loaded pistol.

Thinking that the gun was a toy, the older boy took a shot at the toddler and hit him in the head, which put him in critical condition. Kashif’s mother, Karen, ran into the room after she heard a shot, she called the ambulance right away. The owner of the gun was also in the house at that moment, it was Karen’s friend Robert.

The man grabbed the weapon and stormed out, but soon was caught by the police and arrested as an illegal owner of a pistol. Robert was “charged with first-degree reckless endangerment, a felony, and criminal possession of a weapon and endangering the welfare of a child” (McQuiston par. 9).

Lorenzo’s parents agreed that his 8-year old cousin could not be held responsible for what happened, Robert was the one at fault in this accident, he should not have brought the gun and left it in the place where the children could reach it (McQuiston, par. 14).

The last article is “Another Slaying in Chicago, Another 11-Year-Old Suspect” by Don Terry, the author tells a story of a cold-blooded murder of an elderly woman committed by an 11-year old child. The 84-year old Mrs. Gilvis was found dead in her bathroom, her hands were tied up, her throat was slip and there were marks of beating up on her body.

Investigating this crime the police interrogated the victim’s neighbors, among whom there was a boy nicknamed Frog. He kept naming suspects, who proved not to be the murderers, so after all, the detectives agreed that the boy might have had something to do with the crime. After Frog was arrested, his mother revealed the details of the relationship between him and Mrs. Gilvis, she stated that the victim was hateful towards the boy based on his ethnicity (Terry, par. 13).

The boy confirmed that hated the neighbor back, which makes his motive to kill “older than the nation” (Terry, par. 12). The described crimes happened in New Jersey, New York and Illinois accordingly. They were only a small part of all accidents that occurred all around the United States territory resulting from misplacement and reckless handling of weapons, allowing the children to reach them.

In most cases such situations are the consequences of irresponsible parenting and the indifference of the communities towards the youth growing up in dysfunctional families and dangerous districts.

Works Cited

McFadden, Robert D. “Mischievous Boys, a Stolen Gun and the Loss of a Life.” Nytimes.com. New York Times, 5 Sep. 1994. Web.

McQuiston , John T. “In a ‘Game,’ Boy Shoots His Cousin Handgun Seemed Just Like a Toy.” Nytimes.com. New York Times, 5 Sep. 1994. Web.

Terry, Don. “Another Slaying in Chicago, Another 11-Year-Old Suspect.”Nytimes.com. New York Times, 5 Sep. 1994. Web.

Introduction

Databases are used by organizations to store huge information that is used to achieve both short-term and long-term goals. Since the introduction of computing systems across the world, firms have encountered problems associated with losing of information stored on databases. It has been shown that hackers may be encouraged by many reasons, for example, profit, challenges and/or enjoyment. This report focuses on discussing the hacking incident of the New York Times website.

Body

In 1998, it was reported that the New York Times website was hacked by persons who were motivated by grudge (Happy Hacker. 2013). They broke into the website on a Sunday morning to prove to a woman, who was about to publish a book on hacking, that they could gain access to any website (Happy Hacker. 2013). The incident was renamed “hacking for girls”. Interestingly, the lady was an employee of a major company that was providing New York Times with security services in relation to its website. When the criminals told her that they could hack into any site, she challenged them to gain access to a ‘secure’ website, such as that of the New York Times. In this context, it can be argued that the persons were well versed with the knowledge of breaking into computer systems. Although they knew that their actions were illegal, and they could be prosecuted in a court, they went on to execute their plans.

On that Sunday morning, the hackers periodically took control of the website and gave their remarks, which were in the form of “comment tags”. However, the remarks could only be seen on the original material (source), but not on the website due to coding issues. Just like conventional hackers, they behaved in a self-parody manner that was characterized by typing in capital letters. This has been a common observation among the criminals that is believed to make them feel like they are stereotypical computer geeks. However, during the incident, they typed without any form of mistakes. An example of the literary figures quoted was Voltaire.

It is indicated that the computer geeks used some lines after they gained control of the website, such as “immature kids were able to bypass…$25,000 firewalls (and) bypass the security put there” (Happy Hacker. 2013, par. 7). Based on the mentioned statement, it is clear that they were confident that they had achieved their mission. In fact, it was a major accomplishment to break into the computer systems of the giant firm, which was contracting the services of established company for web security. To them, they felt that they were “kids”, yet they broke into a very expensive web platform.

At some point, the hackers became very personal to the extent of using abusive language toward the woman who motivated them to break into the site. In addition, they insulted personnel of the firm who were charged with the responsibility of ensuring security of the New York Times site. They said that they were protesting against the arrest of their fellow hacker. They succeed to some extent.

Conclusion

In conclusion, it is evident that the incident involved upcoming computer geeks who felt that they were knowledgeable to break into any website across the world. In fact, they demonstrated that firms should use more effective approaches to prevent their databases from hacking.

Reference

Happy Hacker. (2013). Hackers break into N.Y Times Website. Web.

A brief summary of the case

The New York Times and the Washington Post published the top-secret “Pentagon Papers” in 1971, revealing government duplicity in the Vietnam War. The Nixon administration obtained an injunction against The New York Times on the grounds of national security. However, in brief per curiam opinion, the Court observed that, in this case, the government had not shown the justification of prior restraint on freedom of the press. This was deemed to be achieved when the government met the heavy burden in justifying this restraint (New York Times).

The legal issue in the case and the decision of the court

Legal issues

1. Did the United States government show the justification for the need to meet the heavy burden for prior restraint on freedom of the press?
2. Did they impose such restraint on the Washington post and New York Times?

The Courts Rule

The government has an obligation to show the justification of prior restraint on freedom of the press (New York Times). However, in this case, the court held that the government had not met the heavy burden of showing justification. Therefore, no action was imposed on the New York Times.

Summarize the Court’s decision and legal reasoning

Although the U.S. Federal government has limited powers, it has supreme authority within its sphere of influence. In addition, laws that are made based on the constitution become the supreme law of the land. The constitution does not expressly prohibit or deter either power that is implied or incidental. Based on the Freedom of Expression clause, a legitimate end, which is within the confines of the constitution, and which appropriate and not prohibited by the constitution, can be employed to achieve that end.

In addition, most of the systems in the United States have been subjected to restraints on freedom of expression. They are heard by the Supreme Court, which bears a heavy presumption towards its validity or otherwise. The government is indebted to create a heavy burden of showing justifications to any prior restraint. The United States, according to the case, had sought to enjoin the Washington Post and The New York Times from the publication of the contents that were confidential. The lower courts did not issue their judgment but referred the case to the Supreme Court (New York Times).

The court argued that the constitutional mandate of creating a heavy burden of showing justification is not a separate power neither is it an end of the government, but rather it is another avenue of executing other powers that are sovereign. This mandate can be executed or exercised if it becomes an appropriate way of carrying out the powers conferred to the federal government by the U.S. Constitution. If there is a suitable method of executing the powers that are expressly provided by the constitution of the U.S. federal government, the extent of its necessity can never be a question of judicial cognizance, but rather it is a legislative discretion.

The U.S. government had a mandate of establishing or creating a heavy burden of showing justification for freedom of the press. As such, it would have prevented The New York Times from publishing the confidential report that was under the safe-custody of the government. However, since such a mandate was not constitutionally met, The New York Times enjoyed their freedom with minimal interference from the government (New York Times).

Meaning of civil rights

Civil rights are the entitlements to some freedoms guaranteed by the laws of a country. They are acquired by a person by virtue of being a citizen, and some of them, such as the right to sound governance and equal treatment, cannot be denied to an individual (Weisbrot 89). However, a civil right such as holding a public office can be lost depending on the character and conduct of a person.

As discussed above, The New York Times was not constitutionally deprived of freedom of the press, and the right to access vital information in any state within the confines of the federal government. In the ancient period, Civil rights have undergone amendments due to changes in society. The aim is to realize a democratic society. America was characterized by oppression and slavery amongst its citizens. Civil rights amendments, in 19^th Century, abolished slavery, conferred citizenship, barred racial discrimination, and later the amendments on equal rights on jury duty. Ideally, these changes have enhanced the political, socio-economic, and cultural stability in the U.S.

As the Supreme Courts issues its finality on cases affecting society, it has enhanced democratic and unified decisions. In case of misunderstanding on the laws that govern society, as highlighted in the above case, the Court provides a guideline and direction on the path of justice. The Supreme Court acts as an avenue for democratic governance in society (McCloskey et al. 65).

Evaluate the significance of the case and its place in history

This case was of immense significance in the American history because it proclaimed that the U.S government had implied powers, in addition to the constitutional mandate. This landmark decisions provided an opportunity for the federal government to develop or change its powers to meet the demands of a changing world. Freedom of the press has been quite a delicate issue that, if not handled with care, may ruin the reputation of the state. Therefore, it is the mandate of the government to follow the laws as set out by the constitution in order to mitigate any further impromptu adversity.

The New York Times’ case denotes democracy that prevails in the United States. It shows that there is minimal interference of the legislature by the executive. Ideally, most of the developing countries need to borrow a leaf from this case. Independence of the legislature is a vital component in realizing a democratic world, without any oppression.

Court’s Decision

The ruling made by the Court was the right decision, as it was in accordance to the United States Constitution. As stipulated by the Constitutional Act on Freedom of the press, the government needs to meet the heavy burden of showing justification in order to impose any restraints on freedom of the press. The New York Time and Washington Post understood that there was no mandate by the government to restrict them from accessing their top-secret information and printing them. Therefore, no action was to be imposed on the New York Times.

Works Cited

McCloskey, Robert & Levinson, Sanford. The American Supreme Court. New York: University of Chicago Press, 2010. Print.

New York Times Co. v. United States. 403 U.S. 713. Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. 1971. LexisNexis Academic. Web.

Weisbrot, Robert. Freedom bound: A History of America’s Civil Rights Movement. London: Routledge, 2006. Print.

Introduction

The American constitution has been very important in defining the relationship that exists between the three arms of government. The executive, judiciary, and the legislature are three independent units of the government. The constitution explains how these three arms of the government should relate to one another. The legislature is responsible for enacting laws. The executive implements the law while the judiciary is always called upon to interpret the law. Jefferson (1995) says that these three bodies should discharge their duties without any form of intimidation from other arms of government. In this particular case of New York Times versus the government, the court was called upon to undertake its constitutional right of interpreting the law. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the New York Times.

Analysis of the Case

It is important to understand the constitution of this country in its entirety before finally concluding whether or not the decision made by the courts was correct. Understanding the Constitution’s Articles II, III, and the First Amendment may shed more light on what could have lead the judiciary to make its decision. Article two of the American constitution defines the formation and powers executive, while Article 3 talks about the formation and powers of the judiciary. From these two articles of the constitution, it comes out clearly that the judiciary is bound by no laws to make decisions in favor of the executive. The judiciary is an independent arm that is responsible for the Americans. To this extent, it would be easy to say that the Supreme Court was justified to decide by favoring the New York Times because their interpretation of the law guided their decision. Moreover, the courts are responsible for the people of America and not to the executive. The decision of the courts could have been because the executive lied to the public, and there was every right to make the public aware of this fact. To the Supreme Court, the executive had no moral right to classify information that was misleading to the public. The supreme court must have felt that the executive- being answerable to the people of America- had a responsibility of coming out and telling the truth about this issue instead of misleading Americans (Whittington, 2006). In this light, the court’s decision could be considered right.

However, it is important to understand the constitution in its holistic form other than from one biased side. It is important to understand the letter and the spirit of the law in order to make sound decisions. The United States executive has a mandate from people to engage in wars whenever this may be considered necessary, especially when there is a feeling that these external forces threaten America’s interests. During such wars, it is important to consider some information classified to protect the nation. For instance, the United States is home to people from all over the world, including the people of Vietnam and their sympathizers. Some of these people are enemies of this country. According to Dorf (2009), releasing information to the public would make this information reach these enemies and they can use it against this country. The executive shall have failed when such a thing happens. Once information is considered classified, it should forever remain so even after the war.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court, therefore, made an error by allowing this information, which had previously been considered classified, to reach the public. This court acted in contempt of the executive and all the constitutional powers bestowed upon it.

References

Dorf, M. (2009). Constitutional law stories. New York: Foundation Press.

Jefferson, T. (1995). The republic of letters: The correspondence between Thomas Jefferson and James Madison, 1776-1826. New York: Norton.

Whittington, K. (2006). How to read the constitution: Self-government and the jurisprudence of originalism. Washington: Heritage Foundation.

Introduction

The extent to which modern society perceives and evaluates information has currently become extremely correlated with the approaches media choose to portray relevant news and information. Thus, when tackling topics that are of paramount importance to society, media sources are to understand the scopes of responsibility they should obtain to operate truthful and objective information. Despite the common belief that newspapers as a medium lost their relevance many years ago, modern recipients are likely to address either printed or digital versions of popular newspapers in pursuit of objective data (Radcliffe and Ali, 2017). Moreover, the perception of information from both printed and digital resources does not differ as drastically as it is generally understood by the broad public (Neijens and Voorveld, 2018). As a result, one may assume that analyzing the information represented in the digital replicas of newspapers is important in terms of realizing how social cognition may be controlled and even manipulated by media sources.

When comparing the information presented by social media platforms and publicist media such as newspapers, it would be reasonable to justify that the latter is generally considered more objective and trustworthy (Allington et al., 2020). For this reason, people reading these media sources seldom ponder the scopes of objectivity in the information presented, as they perceive professional journalism as inherently impartial and deprived of personal feelings on the matter outlined. Such a misconception is especially evident considering the realities of the COVID-19 pandemic, as the amount of data published hourly differs greatly across the media sources. Hence, the primary aim of the present report is to analyze how such media sources as The New York Times and The Washington Post convey the data concerning the current state of the healthcare workforce in the context of the pandemic pressure.

Media Source Outline

One of the major criteria considered when searching for media sources was their credibility, as the paper’s good reputation contributes to people’s intentions to read the articles without critical evaluation and fact-check. Thus, according to the Pew Research Center (2019), The New York Times, along with The Washington Post, were regarded as some of the most influential and credible digital media sources in the state. Considering the relative equality of these sources in terms of reputation, they were chosen to demonstrate how professional journalism could implicitly represent biases and consideration of the whole editorial service.

Findings and Analysis

The primary research topic chosen for the analysis was the representation of healthcare workers through the prism of the COVID-19 challenges they face every day. The major concepts. Analyzed throughout the texts included the linguistic style, intertextuality, and narrative. Thus, the first text found in The New York Times is written by A. Gardiner (2021), and it revolves around the issue of healthcare workers who continue to work under the pandemic condition after COVID-19 took away someone from their closest surroundings. The article itself is called ‘A year of risk, fear, and loss for families in medicine: for many nurses and doctors, medicine was an inherited calling and one that bound couples. Then the virus threatened the ones they love’ (Gardiner, 2021, para. 1). Such a title reveals much information about the text, as it explicitly uses such emotionally colored lexis as ‘fear,’ ‘loss,’ ‘love,’ etc.

Thus, it may be assumed that the primary intention of the author was to appeal emotionally to the reader, so the text should be perceived more as expressive rather than rhetic, or the one rendering a non-ambiguous sense of the utterance. The very article is presented in the form of a semi-structured interview encompassing at least three respondents. The vast majority of information was rendered through direct quotations either in 1st or 3rd person, emphasizing the idea that the thoughts outlined were by no means correlated with the author’s subjective perception.

Another article found in The NY Times concerned the issue of workforce shortage caused by the pandemic. It is written by R. Abelson (2020), and it is called ‘Doctors are calling it quits under the stress of the pandemic: thousands of medical practices are closing, as doctors and nurses decide to retire early or shift to less intense jobs’. Like the previous article, such a heading is rather expressive due to the usage of such phrases as ‘thousands of medical practices,’ as they draw attention yet provide no explicit data. As far as the very narrative is concerned, it may be outlined that the author manages to combine an expressive component of referring to one’s subjective ideas presented during a semi-structured interview and quantitative data published by other credible sources.

The second media source tackled in the report was The Washington Post. The two articles encountered in the newspaper have seemingly different communicative intentions, yet the conclusions drawn from the texts remain rather coherent. Thus, the first article written by Arnold-Forster and Schotland (2021) is called ‘Covid-19 only exacerbated longer pattern of health-care worker stress’. The article represents a summary of quantitative data collected from a variety of primary sources. However, despite the academic tone, the authors identify themselves with the reader by using 2nd person pronouns in the plural. The narration obtains a diachronic perspective, as it dwells on the historical development of health-care professionals’ perception of their job and vocation while comparing the situation with the context of the United Kingdom.

The next article is written by W. Wan (2021), and it is called ‘Burned out by the pandemic, 3 in 10 health-care workers consider leaving the profession: after a year of trauma, doctors, nurses, and other health workers are struggling to cope. Similar to The NY Times, this article comprises the experiences of various medical professionals to appeal to the broad public. However, a significant feature of the present narration is the fact that these stories are closely interrelated with the quantitative data presented by credible sociological institutions. Thus, the functional aim of such a news story is to empirically justify the relevance of data behind the process of health care and coping mechanisms.

When analyzing these sources, it is of paramount importance to assess the notion of intertextuality that may be regarded through the prism of the target audience of the aforementioned newspapers. Thus, the target audience of The NY Times, more than 70% of the readers, are Democrats with a university degree (Djordjevic, 2021). Considering such data, it would be reasonable to assume that the code embedded in the articles consists of many implications that represent the values specific to the audience. Democrats, who comprise the vast majority of the newspaper readers, are notorious for their intentions to rebuild the flawed health care system across the US to secure both quality and equity (‘Health care,’ n.d.). For this reason, the manifestation of healthcare workers’ stress implicitly addresses the overall challenge of labor allocation and respect within the healthcare community.

The target audience of The Washington Post is practically the same, although there is no publicly available information on the share of Democratic readership (‘Audience research: demographics,’ n.d.). For this reason, it may be concluded that both these media sources, although providing relevant and proven quantitative data, could not be perceived as unbiased and objective. Every article discussed in the report implicitly encourages people to act to modify the situation and secure better conditions for health care workers. However, the authors are driven by the presupposition that people reading the text are middle-aged white Democrats who happen to be the most powerful social class in the national context.

Reflection and Conclusion

Having closely analyzed the peculiarities of media’s presentation of similar topics, one may conclude that the modern recipient is implicitly deprived of the right to trust the information presented. Instead, the reader should question the primary message of the text by questioning the lexis and details outlined. For example, when evaluating the information represented in all four texts on the matter of healthcare workers’ well-being, it becomes evident that the authors are convinced that everyone reading the article is already aware of the deplorable situation in the realm of national health care. The vast majority of manipulations are employed rather discreetly, drawing the reader’s attention through emotive lexis, generalization, use of metaphors, and strong narrative. Considering this scenario, recipients are to take into account the primary fact-checked data before evaluating it from the narrator’s perspective.

References

Abelson, R. (2020) Doctors are calling it quits under stress of the pandemic. Web.

Allington, D. et al. (2020) ‘Health-protective behaviour, social media usage and conspiracy belief during the COVID-19 public health emergency’, Psychological Medicine, pp.1-7.

Arnold-Forster, A., and Schotland, S. (2021) Covid-19 only exacerbated a longer pattern of health-care worker stress. Web.

Audience research: demographics. (n.d.) Web.

Djordjevic, M. (2021) 25 insightful New York Times readership statistics [the 2021 edition]. Web.

Gardiner, A. (2021) A year of risk, fear and loss for families in medicine. Web.

Health care. (n.d.) Web.

Neijens, P.C. and Voorveld, H.A. (2018) ‘Digital replica editions versus printed newspapers: Different reading styles? Different recall?’ New Media & Society, 20(2), pp.760-776.

Pew Research Center. (2019) State of news media methodology.Web.

Radcliffe, D. and Ali, C. (2017) Local news in a digital world: small-market newspapers in the digital age. Columbia Journalism School.

Wan, W. (2021) Burned out by the pandemic, 3 in 10 health-care workers consider leaving the profession. Web.

The Chosen Option

In this research paper, the chosen movie is ‘Page One: Inside the New York Times Trailer,’ which focuses on the increasingly dropping number of people reading print newspapers. Many people now rely on online news, and that means print media is becoming less popular, especially among the younger American generation. It forces newsrooms such as New York Times to re-strategize their operations to ensure that it can move from print to online media when delivering news to its target audience. The new trend has also forced the company to lay off a section of its employees in the print media department as it responds to the market forces.

The short movie clip also captures issues such as news ethics, coverage of current events, corporate ownership, media relationships, and newsroom politics, among other issues. In this short movie, it comes out clearly that people still value news. They want to know about the current events and factors that affect their lives, either directly or indirectly. However, what has changed is the mode of delivering that message. The emerging technologies have created a platform where people can have access to news via their tablets, iPads, and smartphones instead of newspapers. It forces news companies to align their operations with the changing market trends.

Timeline of Activities

According to Hoberman (2014), one of the most important stages in a research project is planning. It is important to plan for the activities to be carried out and clearly outlining the time each activity should take. In this project, the researcher considered it important to come up with a timeline of activities that will be undertaken to ensure that the paper is well researched and written by the deadline. The following table shows a timeline of activities in this project.

As shown in the above table, the activities have been identified and time allocated to ensure that within the five weeks, all activities will be carried out without having a situation where the project runs behind schedule. Kraus (2013) advises that with an effective plan, it is possible to achieve the desired outcome in a research project. Knowing when each activity should be undertaken makes it easy to work systematically towards the desired goals and objectives of the research project.

Page One: Inside the New York Times Trailer

The movie focuses on the major changes that are taking place in the field of journalism. Most of these changes were unprecedented, and it forces major newsrooms such as New York Times to adjust their operations to be in line with the changing trends. The emerging technologies have brought out disruptive changes that define the mode of delivering the message to the audience. The following are some of the key issues coming out in this movie.

Print vs. Online

Leading newsrooms such as the New York Times thrived by delivering news to their audience through print media. Readership was high, and people relied on newspapers to get detailed information about the current events. However, emerging technologies are changing the mode of delivering the message. People are becoming less interested in the print media because of the emerging options of getting the news through new gadgets such as iPad and Smartphone. As shown in the movie, the newsrooms still have to tell the story in a professional way.

However, the mode of delivery must change in line with the changing forces in society. As print media becomes less popular, newsrooms are shifting to online media. New York Times is now keen on ensuring that its audience can get the news via online platforms. It may not be the platform stakeholders in this industry consider appropriate, but it is one that has to be embraced for a firm to survive. New York Times now believes that in the near future, print media will be completely irrelevant because people will be fully relying on online media to get their news.

WikiLeaks

Julian Assange’s WikiLeaks has come up with an unprecedented strategy of delivering news that is causing concern to governments, especially the government of the United States. In their code of ethics, journalists are expected to avoid passing classified information to the public to avoid jeopardizing government operations and the country’s security.

However, WikiLeaks primarily focuses on releasing classified information. Although this practice has yet to gain legal and moral standing in the field of journalism, the global society now rely on it to get to know what their political leaders do in secrete that my later have impact on their lives. Julian Assange himself justifies the need to hold the political class to account by revealing what they do while in office, especially things that may not pass moral standards. In the movie, it is shown that newsrooms are still struggling with the need to operate ethically and legally while at the same time trying to be as transparent as possible.

Journalists’ Jobs

Journalism remains a very important profession in the modern society as people needs to be informed about the events taking place across the world. However, career in journalism is becoming less stable compared to how it was in the past. New York Times is forced to trim its workforce as it shifts from the print media to online media.

The company still prints newspapers, but in lesser quantities because of the dropping demand. It means that many people are losing their jobs in this industry. However, the trend does not mean that journalists’ jobs have become less important. In fact, journalism is at a critical stage where it has to stand out amidst a society that is awash with unverified and biased information in the social media. Journalists have a responsibility of verifying their information before disseminating it to the audience. However, that is lacking in the social media.

The years of unprecedented change makes it important for journalists to go beyond the obvious and to ensure that newsrooms remain credible and reliable source of information. Journalism in times of crisis has become more important than it ever was in the past. The raging wars in Syria, Iraq, and other Middle East countries still need to be told.

The social media may not be a reliable source of information because individuals may not risk their lives to cover such stories. However, journalists can and they often inform the world about the untold suffering of the victims of such wars. It is only the journalists who can put leaders to task in times of crisis by asking them tough questions about current events. Journalists help the people to understand how their government views a given crisis and measures put in place to address it. They ensure that leaders are held into account at all times, especially in cases where things are not running as would be expected.

Newspaper Business

Newspaper business is changing, and major newsrooms such as New York Times have to redefine their operations to ensure that they not only remain profitable but also relevant to their audience. In this business, the most important source of revenue is often through the advertisements placed by various companies (Lipstadt, 2012). However, the companies may only be willing to pay for such adverts if they are assured of a wide readership, especially among the targeted population.

However, the current trends show that the audience is shifting from print to online news. Newsrooms, as companies keen on making profits, must change with the changing market trends. They have to deliver their content in a mode that is most preferable to the audience. Trimming the workforce as a corporate strategy is one of the outcomes of this major shift from print to online (digital) media. The New York Times is currently considering a move to trim further its workforce as some have become redundant in their service delivery. The profitability of this company and its ability to survive in this increasingly competitive business environment lies on its ability to change with the changing trends by choosing the right mode of delivering messages and having the right workforce.

References

Hoberman, J. (2014). Film after film: or, what became of 21st century cinema. New York, NY: Verso.

Kraus, J. (2013). All the art that’s fit to print (and some that wasn’t): Inside the New York Times op-ed page. New York, NY: Chichester.

Lipstadt, D. (2012). Denying the holocaust: The growing assault on truth and memory. London, UK: The Free Press.