In the second media source I assessed, Le Monde, its views were anti-US and in some cases pro-Iraq. One article stated that nearly four out of five French disapprove of the war and express strong criticisms toward the United States. Other articles include titles such as “This bloody and useless war,” and “Anti-americanism.” Another thing I noticed in the French articles was that the term coalition was in quotes. I guess that has something to do with the arrogance of the French, but that’s a completely different story. Le Monde was very skeptical of the war and obviously so because France did not want to get involved.
Over the course of three days, USA Today coverage seems to obviously favor the United States, but was balanced in terms of pro-war versus anti-war. Each day I noticed that there was at least a few articles that wrote about anti-war demonstrations or articles that would appeal to people that oppose the war. The coverage in the newspaper seemed not only to touch on the successes and battles we are winning, but it also did a good job with letting you know problems the US is having. In an article titled “Prewar predictions coming back to bite,” it discussed how all the early thoughts of a quick and easy war are testing the credibility of the Bush Administration. There were also up to date articles on the progress the US was making. I thought USA today was the most balanced of the three media sources.
Le Monde and USA Today were similar in one aspect: they both had several reports on how the war is impacting individuals. Their approaches on how they covered it was exactly the opposite. When reading articles of the USA Today, headlines were filled with titles such as “Loved ones grieving for heroes lost at war,” and “2 families cherish memories of proud, dedicated Marines.” These were accompanied by photos and touching stories of how good of people they were. “Anguish and criticism of the families of American soldiers” was a headline that topped the French newspaper. The article focused on families who disagree with the war and are outraged that there son or daughter is in the war. In one of the quotes, someone even made a reference to Vietnam. It is amazing to see how one aspect of the war is reported so differently from country to country.
The articles I found from CNN.com seemed to focus more on government actors and the big picture. They covered the big stories which were common to most media sources in addition to other articles that seemed to concentrate on government and procedure. By this I mean that there was a lot of information on where and how the US is advancing. There were a lot of articles about takeovers, increasing levels of military support, and things of that nature. On the whole, I thought CNN.com gave a very good overview of what is going on over there.
In terms of scope, USA Today covered just about anything and everything. When there are at least 10 pages of information a day covering the war in Iraq, it covers just about everything. Most of the articles I found from the other two media sources had similar coverage in USA Today. Some of the articles included a full political analysis in stories such as “Prewar predictions coming back to bite.” They wrote on problems with the early predictions of war, which I have stated above.
France’s coverage of the war did not go as in depth as it did over here. There was still plenty of news, but not to the extent of what is available through US media sources. Their website had extensive information on the war, but it was not the main focus of news. The coverage proved to be a good source of information in providing a brief overview of what is taking place.
After comparing and assessing the different coverage, I have found that different media sources present the war in very different ways. Some focused on all of the success the US is having, and others concentrated on all of the problems associated with the war. The French media sources, for example, tended to have a negative outlook along with having many negative opinions associated with the war. This could have been presumed simply by the fact that the French were opposed to the war before it even began. On the other hand, CNN.com concentrated mainly on the beneficial points of the war as well as the success the US is having. USA Today presented a more balanced view of the war. They pointed out problems with the war, but also stressed the progress the US is making. Clearly media coverage varies from country to country and between sources. It is important to keep this in mind when choosing what media source you follow so as not to get a one-sided view of the war.
