The arrest of Henry Louis Gates, Jr., a prominent scholar and director of Harvard’s Institute for African and African-American Research, made headlines across the globe this past week. At first the details were scarce, but after several hours of the story breaking the events behind the arrest had become much more clear.
Gates had just returned to Boston from a business trip and when he tried to enter his home in Cambridge the door wouldn’t open. He ended up having to push his way in, which to several neighbors it appeared someone was attempting to break in. After the neighbors called the police, an argument ensued between Gates and a Sergeant Crowley, after which Crowley booked Gates on the charge of disorderly conduct.
Why did these events make national and international headlines? There seem to be several aspects to the story, but two main points are doubtless the fact of a white officer arresting a black man in his own home (possible racial profiling?), and also the comment by President Obama on the situation itself, with him referring to the police as acting “stupidly.”
We’ll take a look at four articles covering the aftermath of the Gates incident:
The New York Times, “Obama Shifts Tone on Gates After Mulling Debate”
The NYTimes, well known for a liberal bias, comments on Obama’s effort to “diffuse a volatile national debate” over the events that had occurred in Boston last week. The article, which is two pages long, focuses on Obama’s shift in tone from Wednesday, when he made the “stupidly” remark during his national news conference, to Friday, when he placed calls to both Crowley and Gates, inviting them to the White House for a beer to discuss the situation. The Times seems to praise Obama’s swift reassessment of the matter.
BBC News, “Harvard Row Highlights US Tensions”
This article focuses on the racial tensions that still exist in the US, with the detail of a study showing that blacks are 3 times as likely as whites to be pulled over for traffic violations in Los Angeles. They refer to this study because at one point during the argument that took place at Gates’ home during his arrest, he shouted, “This is what happens to black men in America!” The BBC states that Gates, indeed, may have a point. This article seems to be somewhat unbiased, looking at raw numbers of a study done by a Yale professor.
USA Today, “Professor Gates: Ready to Move on from Arrest”
USA Today, known for its short article length and ease of reading, focuses on Gates’ willingness to move on and use the events from last week in a positive manner, bringing attention to injustice that still occurs in the US. Gates says that he has accepted President Obama’s invitation to the White House and that he looks forward to meeting with Sergeant Crowley. A noticeable difference in this article is not the length per say, but the shortness of each individual paragraph. I believe this is used to help hold readers’ attention.
Huffington Post, “Obama Addresses Gates at Briefing, Says He Called Officer”
The Huff Post is well known for its liberal slant, but has also become a trusted internet news source. This article is very similar to that of the NYTimes piece. The length and format are very alike, and the tone and subject matter are as well. There is, perhaps, more of a focus on Obama’s actions, as much of his speech during the conference and the briefing are quoted.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I agree that the usa today's article was very short but straight to the point. The article that I read from usa today was not as descriptive and detailed as the NYTimes but it was fair, in my opinion
ReplyDeleteit was simply a misunderstanding and overreaction for both side. It shouldn’t upgraded to a racial debate and attract such widely national and international attentions.
ReplyDeleteI would ask if the fact in and of itself that a story garners such a strong response from so many people makes it worth media attention.
ReplyDeleteIt is interesting to look at how stories are reported into historical contexts and cultural narratives. If we want to look more critically at media stories, instead of trying to divorce them from the lenses many people/reporters tell them through, we might ask why does this story trigger this response? How and why does it get placed into this debate about cops and minorities? What is useful about looking at it alongside this history? Is it also problematic?
I find a pattern among our group of perceiving the coverage of an event by the BBC to be the most impartial. I'm not sure, however, whether this pattern stems from actual lack of (or minimal) bias, or from a preconceived notion that the BBC will provide the most unbiased coverage. It's difficult to say from the articles you have chosen, particularly the BBC article, whether the BBC provides unbiased coverage of this story.
ReplyDeleteOf your accounts of the four articles, it seems the BBC is the only source that cites material beyond the event to emphasize a portion of the story. This, to me, constitutes blatant bias. However, from the title of the article, it seems that its purpose was to, in fact, address the story of racial tensions in the US through the lens of the Gates arrest, rather than fully cover the story of the Gates arrest itself. I’m not aware of whether or not this is the primary coverage of this story that the BBC has provided.
Still, the possibility of a nationalistic slant should not be ignored. In my analysis of BBC coverage of the recent money-laundering and corruption scandal, I found that much unsympathetic emphasis was placed on the fact that corruption exists in the US at such a level. The emphasis was to such a degree that it felt as though the article was attempting to elicit an 'SMH' reaction from the reader (shorthand for Shaking My Head; comes with an implied "tsk, tsk" undertone). Bias comes in all forms; we as consumers should come into a story with as little bias as possible, so we can fully observe the ways in which bias is present in a story.