Choose a recent news event that was covered by the major news outlets (print or online or video) on the same day

Choose a recent news event that was covered by the major news outlets (print or online or video) on the same day


  1. Reading an Article
  2. Researching Online
  3. Writing your Post
  4. Commenting on At Least Two of your Classmate’s Posts

NOTE: Two excellent student samples of this assignment are provided below the rubric on this page.

First Step – read this article (attached). Take the time to really understand it and get a sense of the biases it discusses. This knowledge will serve you WAY beyond this class…

11 Types of Media Biases -articleattached

Second Step – Choose a recent news event that was covered by the major news outlets (print or online or video) on the same day, and compare that coverage across at least three different journalistic organizations – one from the far right, one from the far left, and one considered more “centered” or objective. Here’s a chart to help you choose your three outlets. (And there are more choices available. IF you don’t see what you’re looking for here, you can look up other news sources on the AllSides website Links to an external site. https://www.allsides.com/media-bias and it will tell you which, if any, biases that source tends to offer. )

Third Step – Write 300 or more words comparing the differences you found in the coverage of that one news event, across all three sites (Left, Center, Right). NOTE: Your assignment must be formatted like one of the two student examples provided below! (Improperly formatted assignments will lose points.)

  • Be to compare the same news event across all three stories, so you’re comparing fairly, and include discussion of the headlines (if it’s a print source), some examples of the types of biases, and mention of at least two of the biases described in the assigned article, with examples of how they show up in your chosen story.
  • Be sure it’s the same event being covered by each outlet, and include links to all three of the sources you’re comparing.
  • Bold each of the bias types when you mention them for the first time.
  • Conclude your submission with a paragraph of reflection that summarizes your experience/opinion of the assignment.

NOTE: There are two excellent student examples posted below. Format your submission like one of those!

Fourth Step – after you’ve posted your comparison, you’ll be able to see what your classmates have posted. Give them a read and then give at least two of them an in-depth comment on their work and/or on the coverage they chose. You can agree, respectfully disagree, add something new, etc. but your comments have to add something new to the conversation and be substantial enough to earn the number of points assigned.

RUBRIC:

1. One discussion post that meets all of the following criteria (20 Points):

  • 300 or more words, formatted like one of the two examples below, that accomplishes the following:
    • Clearly identifies a single, specific news event that was chosen to research. (Include description of event and date of event coverage.)
    • Clearly identifies the three news sources (left, center, right) chosen to compare/contrast, and links to each one’s coverage of the chosen event.
    • Compares/contrasts the coverage across all three sources, including use of at least two bias factors identified in the article, with specific examples from each source.
      • Note: (The first time you mention a media bias type from the article, bold it – so we know exactly what bias you’re discussing at a glance. For example: “The CNN website put this spin on the article by using the word…etc.)
  • Concluding paragraph of reflection, summarizing your experience/opinion of this assignment.

NOTE: Two excellent, recent student example submissions appear below. You must match the format of one of those examples.

2. Two or more comments on classmate posts that meet the following criteria (10 Points):

  • All graded classmate comments are due within 24 hours of the due date for this discussion. Mark your calendar!
  • Starts with a friendly greeting that includes your classmate’s name (required)
  • Your comment is substantial (at least four sentences) and adds something new and meaningful to the conversation.
  • Make at least one of your comments on a post that does not otherwise have any comments yet.
  • Due Date: This assignment is due by 11:59pm on the Due Date. Your classmate comments are due before 11:59pm on the next day (24 hours later).

TIP: Comment on more than two posts and/or respond to your classmates’ comments on your own post, to make me smile and move yourself into the category of “Teacher’s Pet.”

  • (Haha, just kidding! But seriously, this might be the most life-changing conversation you will have all semester. I know you’re tired and otherwise busy, but give yourself the gift of full engagement on this one. Your future self will thank you a hundred times over.)

TWO EXCELLENT, RECENT STUDENT EXAMPLE SUBMISSIONS:

FORMAT YOURS LIKE ONE OF THESE!

Excellent Student Sample #1:

Event: On Oct 19, there was a conference hearing for President Biden’s nominee to lead the U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Chris Magnus. His responses are currently being criticized by news outlets, left and right-leaning. The conference hearing discussed his views on Trump’s Title 42 order that expels migrants before giving them a chance to apply for asylum. He also gave his opinion on how to deal with Covid-19 at the borders.

Left: “Biden’s Pick to Lead CBP Just Confirmed Trump’s Harsh Border Policy Isn’t Going Anywhere” by Fernanda Echavari (Motherjones).

https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2021/10/chris-magnus-biden-nominee-customs-and-border-protection-hearing-title-42/ (Links to an external site.)

Echavari’s title indicates her article is written from a left-leaning perspective as she criticizes Trump’s Title 42. She uses spin words to emphasize her disapproval of Magnus’ responses during today’s hearing. The main focus of her article is Magnus’ decision to not denounce Title 42 and to highlight how controversial Titles 42 is. Apart from her vocabulary, Echavari’s article also contains some Mudslinging. For example, she stated, “Only time will tell if he leaves his morals at home”. While it’s true Magnus was contradicting himself, that phrase shifts its focus on Magnus as a person rather than the issue itself.

Center: “Customs and Border Protection nominee pledges to balance security and humanity” by Joel Rose (NPR)

https://www.npr.org/2021/10/19/1047403295/bidens-cbp-nominee-chris-magnus (Links to an external site.)

Rose’s article title compared to the latter, approves more of Magnus’ response. Throughout the article, Rose repeats the word “balance” which matches a more centrist approach to this political topic. He uses Spin words to sensationalize Magnus’ hearing which other news outlets are criticizing. Rose states “Magnus pledged to bring a “pragmatic and bipartisan” approach to the job”. His article’s media bias is slant. This news article ignores the controversial responses that are circulating on the news right now. His focus is just on Magnus’ more bipartisan responses like being “humane and efficient”.

Right: “Biden border nominee refuses to call migrant surge a ‘crisis,’ claims no ‘ready-to-go plan’ to solve it” by Ronn Bltizer (Fox News)

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/biden-border-nominee-migrant-surge (Links to an external site.)

Blitzer uses spin words like “refuses” “serious”, and expresses his concern on whether or not Magnus takes the situation seriously. He states “ he acknowledged that it is a “very serious” matter for which he provided no solution.” Blitzer also claims that even though Magnus says he understands the conversation that was going on in the hearing, that he really didn’t (mind-reading media bias). There was a lot of focus on Magnus stating Title 42 “helps” the situation at the border yet this article doesn’t criticize his support for Trump’s Title 42 order.

Reflection: This assignment was different from the other ones and more time-consuming however it was very informative. I was reading many news stories and it was hard to choose which one to write about. I was interested in this news story because articles were barely coming in and I tend to keep an eye on immigration stories for personal reasons. It was easy to choose news stories from left-leaning resources. However, I was looking through the Daily Caller and National Review for their pieces on Magnus’ hearing but there weren’t any articles yet. I was personally disappointed by Magnus’ responses and agreed with Echavari’s article. She was very detailed in explaining the situation however I think if she had not taken any personal digs at Magnus’ her article would have been better.

Excellent Student Sample #2:

The event I chose was the House committee responsible for investigating the January 6th Capitol insurrection voting to hold former White House aide Steve Bannon in contempt of Congress. The date for this event is October 19th, 2021.

The three sources I used were the following:

Most of the similarities I found were in the left-leaning and right-leaning publications. Both of these articles seemed to dramatize the event and treat politics like a TV show rather than a topic for serious discussion. For example, the CNN article states the following: “On Tuesday night, members of the committee blasted Bannon for refusing to cooperate with the panel’s probe and said he is “isolated” in doing so as other witnesses are working with the panel.” (CNN.) The CNN website put this spin on the article by using the word “blasted” to describe the way members of the Jan. 6th committee spoke to Bannon. Additionally, the quote places focus on the tension between both parties and does not explicitly mention which members of the committee “blasted Bannon for refusing to cooperate”. Because of this, the quote also proves to be a good example of omission of source attribution.

Similarly, the right-leaning publication, National Review, focused more on the conflict and tension of the story rather than the event itself. However, this publication uses different types of media bias to convey its information. One quote from the National Review article states, “At the committee meeting on Tuesday, Cheney cast doubt on those arguments.” (National Review). The National Review website included an opinion statement presented as fact with the inclusion of this quote. Although Cheney’s exact words are presented immediately after this quote, the publication shares a subjective interpretation of Cheney’s words by suggesting she “cast doubt on those arguments” instead of simply sharing Cheney’s words without prior subjective comments. Additionally, the National Review article states, “House speaker Nancy Pelosi (D., Calif.) rejected two of House minority leader Kevin McCarthy’s (R., Calif.) recommendations for Republican appointees to the committee. McCarthy subsequently pulled his support (Links to an external site.), leaving only staunch anti-Trump Representatives Liz Cheney (R., Wyo.) and Adam Kinzinger (R., Ill.) on the committee.” (National Review). The publication includes a subtle unsubstantiated claim through the use of the adjective “staunch” to describe two members of the January 6th committee. No evidence is presented to prove the claim that Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger are loyal and committed to the anti-Trump cause/agenda.

Although, unlike the other two articles, the Associated Press remains fairly objective throughout the majority of its article on the subject, there is one sentence that includes two different types of media biases. The Associated Press states, “Still defending his supporters who broke into the Capitol that day, Trump has aggressively tried to block the committee’s work by directing (Links to an external site.) Bannon and others not to answer questions in the probe.” (AP). The Associated Press article spins the article by using the adverb “aggressively” to dramatically describe Trump’s legal actions. Additionally, the sentence presents an unsubstantiated claim by stating that Trump is “still defending his supporters who broke into the Capitol” without presenting any evidence that this is the case.

This assignment was very interesting and thoughtful. I have almost always been skeptical and critical of the media, but this assignment showed me a proper, sensible, and effective way to be skeptical of it. I learned how to identify different types of media biases and how they can distort one’s interpretation of the news. Even just through doing the assignment, I could already feel how much my analysis and consumption of media was improving and heightening. I felt I was paying more attention to what I was reading, and I could take away more of the truth from each article. Honestly, this assignment was pretty difficult. The main obstacle was finding a variety of news sources that covered the same current event and applying the media bias types while reading. Once I found them, the writing portion was fairly easy. I’m glad I put in the effort because I am more confident in my ability to consume media and identify different types of media biases that have become all too common in today’s world.

Requirements: Answer ALL parts

Subject: masters Communications

hi! ignore replying to classmate part

Answer preview for the paper on ‘Choose a recent news event that was covered by the major news outlets (print or online or video) on the same day’

major news outlet

APA 371 words

Click the purchase button below to download full answer…….