More Of The Same From "The Soprano State"

The excitement of classic stories of New Jersey's history of corruption has been challenged by a new extreme addition to the canon. In the past week, over forty individuals, including New Jersey public officials and rabbis, have been arrested in connection with a two-part, large-scale, international money laundering ring. The arrests come after a ten-year probe of the activities of the groups involved.

Coverage of this sweep has been widespread, the activities of members of this state reaching news outlets around the world. As this story is one that is full of detail, it is often very easy to see what is emphasized and what is essentially ignored in an account. Though they all tell the same general story, the New York Times, USA Today, BBC News, and The Australian accounts are very interesting in their differences.

The New York Times provides a concerned outlook on the situation in which this case has placed New Jersey residents. It goes beyond stating that this case reinforces stereotypes surrounding New Jersey and corruption; the Times article expresses concern for the people that are surrounded by this culture of corruption. The Times article continues with a large amount of detail regarding the development of the case. Throughout the article, plenty of incriminating quotes are provided for the reader; however, quotes from the accused parties, claiming their innocence, are also present. This account seems to put little energy into attacking the accused parties, placing more energy on the feeling of this being a sad time for New Jersey.

The USA Today account provides significantly less quotes of self-defense from the accused parties. This account also stands out in its emphasis on the political party affiliation of the arrested public officials, and other relevant individuals as well. Though it is stated consistently in all reports that this case involves two distinct sectors with a connecting individual, the USA Today seems to focus on only the political implications of this incident.

BBC News provides a very straightforward account of the corruption case. There is much less history presented than in the Times article, and there is much less mentioned regarding more specific political implications of this case. What is present is a very unsympathetic emphasis on the culture of corruption that clearly remains in New Jersey. Most of the quoted text of this article addresses the fact that corruption is rampant in the state government; little note is given, however, to the social implications of such a presence of corruption.

Interestingly, The Australian provides the most well-rounded account, though at the risk of possibly lacking in detail. The account provided includes the general overtone of disappointment in corruption, while showing a bit of the social concern seen in the Times, and the political emphasis seen in the USA Today account. The Australian also rounds out its article with a small description of public reaction, implying overall support for the crackdown.

Though The Australian seems to provide all of the lenses that I would like to view this story though, its account feels like it was a bit lacking in details from each area of focus. Though an impartial news seems to be what most consumers desire, the value of a somewhat biased news source, that will go into extensive detail of one aspect of a story, cannot be denied. By collecting information from several biased sources, one may gather much more information than would be practical to provide in one impartial source.