Elections in Belarus: Boston Globe vs. Liberty Scott Blog

The Boston Globe's article US Keeps A Close Eye On Elections in Belarus describes the United States (and other International organizations) monitoring of the Presidential elections in Belarus.

The Boston Globe article details the broken relationship between the United States and Belarus, citing the pulling out of both Ambassadors from each country.    As one might expect, The Boston Globe addresses the situation in light of the recent conflict between Georgia and Russia and examines how this may affect Belarus as they attempt to democratize: "Alarmed at the vengeance with which Russia punished Georgia, The United States and the European Union have offered to repair ties with Belarus if Lukashenko makes good on his promises to ease political repression."

The article also explains that political prisoners have been released in Belarus and acknowledges that US officials are trying to understand what motivated the Belorussian government.  In addition to the article, there is a picture of some of the parliamentary candidates burning what appears to be a voter card, in protest of Lukashenko's barring of opposition candidates.

In "Liberty Scott," a blog from New Zealand, the article Belarus Has a Parliamentary Election describes the upcoming election with a decidedly more critical eye toward Belarus' internal repression. 

In the first sentence, the blog refers to Belarus as "Europe's last dictatorship" and provides snide remarks such as "I doubt he will be kidding anyone" in reference to Belarus claiming that it will hold a Western-style election. The blog concludes that "the chances of change in Belarus is next to zero."  

Additionally, the blog takes aim at the "state-run media" and declares that Belarus should not be rewarded for "democracy" (presumably using quotation marks sarcastically.)

Finally, the blog cites The Sunday Telegraph's article, which covers Belorussian (and more specifically Lukashenko's) oppression.  Unlike the Boston Globe article, there is no image accompanying the story.

 

Both articles indicate that Belarus is a strict and oppressive state but, as detailed above, the language they employ is significantly different.  The blog criticizes the government with ease, while The Boston Globe remains respectful even while describing heinous practices.

Sources:

libertyscott.blogspot.com

boston.com/bostonglobe

The Arrest of Radovan Karadzic: NY Times vs. "Finding Karadzic" blog

On July 22, 2008, it was reported that Radovan Karadzic, the former Bosnian Serb leader turned on-the-run war criminal, was arrested in Serbia.

The New York Times, in an article entitled "Bosnian Serb Under Arrest in War Crimes," published a lengthy article detailing the nature of Karadzic's alleged crimes and featured quotes from a Hague prosecutor, Serbian president Boris Tadic, a European Union official, Karadzic's wife and others.

True to form, the Times also referred to Karadzic, a man likely responsible for thousands of deaths, as "Mr. Karadzic."  (Clark Hoyt, the Times' public editor routinely discusses this formal custom)

On the blog, FindingKaradzic.blogspot.com, the headline to the same story was: WE GOT HIM!!    The blog post is very brief, summed up in seven sentences and written in the first person ("I started searching for Radovan Karadzic over six years ago.") 

The blog freely shares it's perspective (''the world is a better place") while the NY Times expresses this sentiment through quotes by officials (Richard Holbrooke: "This is a historic event.")  The blog implies that Karadzic is one of "the worst people in the world," while the NY Times consistently and simply states the charges against Karadzic.  The NY Times treats him as innocent until proven guilty while the blog celebrates the capture of a murderer.

Finally, tellingly, the blog refers to Radovan Karadzic as Karadzic.

Venezuelan Expulsions: NY Times vs. Venezuela 101 blog

Upon first glance, The New York Times' and the "Venezuela 101" blog's account of the recent expulsion of two human rights activists from Venezuela seem very similar.  With the exception of the form (the blog's story is in one single paragraph; the NY Times is in a standard news format), the stories were both written with the same formal style.

However, at the end of the Venezuela 101 story there is a link to a yahoo news site -- the source of the story.  Still, the blog does add its own touches that separate it from both Yahoo News and the NY Times:

1) the title of the blog's post is "Mandela?  Candela?" which is a reference to English "Chavista" Ken Livingston's comparison of Chavez to Mandela.

2) After the article, there is a picture of one of the activists and a picture of a character from the Jimmy Kimmel Show.  The men look similar and the blog's caption asks: "The Jimmy Kimmel Show's Guillermo?"

3) In response to the Mandela reference, the blogger writes: "Guess Kenny was talkin' bout Winnie 'Together hand-in-hand, with our boxes of matches and our necklaces, we shall liberate this country' Mandela'."

The NY Times' article is straightforward, dispensing the same facts as the Yahoo News (and therefore the Venezuela 101) story with no detectable commentary.   It is fairly brief at ten short paragraphs, features a small picture of the director of Human Rights Watch and a two minute video (which is a video link from Reuters.)

The most striking element of the blog's story is the casual nature of their inside jokes juxtaposed with the gravity of the expulsion story.  To compare a Human Rights Activist who was recently exiled from his country to a character on a late night talk show seems at best irrelevant and at worst insensitive.  Judging from the other posts on the Venezuela 101 blog, there is a clear attempt to create a personality that is both informative and cavalier, humorous and earnest.

The NY Times' online edition of the story reflects a blog, or at least a more modern news outlet, in its use of multimedia.  Still, the actual story -- both the content and the form -- remains formal and informative.  

Hurricane Ike: Daily Kos vs. BBC

The Daily Kos' report about the impeding Hurricane Ike storm begins, "Houston, you may have a problem."

The BBCnews' coverage of the same event begins, "Resident's in the US state of Texas have begun to evacuate as Hurricane Ike churns through the Gulf of Mexico."

While both stories are fairly brief, the main differences lie in the feeling of the immediacy created by the Daily Kos' article compared to the more straightforward tone of the BBC.

The Daily Kos' site is colloquial, authored by "Darksyde" and, at times, alarmist: "the economic costs alone...could potentially top 25 billion dollars." The BBC, however, which has no byline, takes a more formal approach, listing facts as opposed to speculation: "The US has pledged $10m (£5.7m) in aid to Haiti, where the UN estimates 800,000 people are in temporary shelters."

The Daily Kos gives information as if residents in need of help may be reading the site: "If you are in an evacuation zone or area of risk and need help getting out, dial 2-1-1." There is also a section, which reads: "What should Texas Residents Do?"

The BBC, on the other hand, informs residents through a more standard news approach -- quoting the mayor of Galveston urging residents to evacuate or stay at home depending on their location.

Finally, while the Daily Kos' focuses on the immediate effects of the storm, the BBC takes a more thorough approach to the story, commenting on the US' aid to Cuba (even noting the 4-decade embargo.) This passage shows a distinctly different style: the Daily Kos presents the story as providing a practical approach to those dealing currently with the storm. The BBC, however, views the storm in the context of world news.