Wednesday, July 16, 2008

Prisoner Exchange

Every news source is going to cover a story with their own particular lens based on a number of different factors. For this assignment, and the first time I have ever contributed to a blog (a bit nerve-wracking for someone who doesn’t like their writing!), I decided to check out a few newspapers from around the globe to see how they covered the recent events transpiring in Israel and Lebanon with the prisoner exchange with the Hezbollah. My sources were CNN (U.S. based), Haaretz (based in Israel),Aljazeera (based in Qatar), Mail & Guardian Online (based in South Africa), The Australian (self explanatory I hope) and the Daily Star (based in Lebanon).
They all covered the basics of the story. Hezbollah turned over the remains of two Israeli soldiers for, in part, five Lebanese prisoners and roughly 200 bodies of fighters that have been killed over the years. Those numbers have varied slightly from article to article. Each paper covered both sides of the story and the reaction that citizens from each country had. The mood in Israel was one of sadness and tears while Lebanon declared today a national holiday with parades and celebrations planned. Every article covered the major points but the amount of details and history included in the article was different in each case. In the Australian and South African paper there was a larger background on the story, in particular about Samir Kuntar.


Kuntar, whose name is spelled different depending on what paper your read, was labeled as hero by some (such as quotes from officials in Lebanon) to a terrorist in the Israeli paper. CNN introduced the reader to Kuntar as a convicted murder, as he was sentenced to life for killing a man in front of his 4-year old daughter, then crushing the little girls skull and killing her in 1979. A third family member died that day when the mother accidently suffocated her 2-year daughter while trying to stifle her cries as they hid during the attack. The Israeli newspaper gave the most graphic account of the incident.
Only after reading all the numerous articles and comparing the information provided was I able see any kind of bias from the newspapers. All articles gave opinions from both sides but the use of words to evoke emotion is what I felt was the real difference in the telling of the story. I feel that I was only able to get a solid grasp on this story after reading accounts from numerous ‘lenses’. Had I read just one article from one perspective I would not been able to acquire such a comprehensive picture of the events.

No comments: