In the first, Lara Logan interviewed Lt. Col. Dan Barnett who casually discussed the current situation in Sadr City. During the five minute clip, Barnett had quite a bit to say; he discussed that the American forces have succumbed to intense fighting since March 25th. Additionally, he agreed with Logan in that the American forces were initially surprised by the ferocity of the fight with the Iraqi people. Accordingly, the Iraqi citizens carefully studied how the Army reacts, so they decided to use more conventional IEDs to fight back. Over the course of the course of the past two weeks, Barnett's coalition has had losses in regards to both vehicle and soldiers. Barnett claims that the number one goal of the troops stationed in Sadr City is to protect the population; they are there to bring medical supplies and humanitarian aid. His stance on civilian causalities is that since the Iraqi people chose to turn the urban environment into a war zone, they are the ones responsible for the civilian causalities faced thus far.
The second piece, On the Ground With U.S. Troops in Sadr City article written by Miguel Marquez also covers American Troops in Sadr City. The article is straightforward and covers the five W's-- who, what, when, where, why. Additionally, Marquez talked with Command Sgt.-Maj. Michael Boom, who states that the U.S. Troops are currently facing some difficulty:
"We can't get supply to them," he said. "They come back on their own but we can't push the normal supply lines to them because it would endanger the soldiers. The combat soldiers load up with everything they need to go back out there... drinking water, they're good with it; no bathrooms, no plumbing, very austere conditions."Barnett, from the first media report, is also quoted in the the second; the tone between the first and the second differ greatly from each other, where he is much more specific and honest in the second.
After watching the first media report and reading the second, I feel that there is a strong difference between the two. Barnett made a strong attempt to portray the current situation in a positive light, where Boom was both raw and honest. Additionally, I believe that the first is much more casual, where it did not go into near as much depth as the second; the first also has a much more positive bias then the second, where the producer wanted to portray everything in a positive light. A bias is present in the second media report as well, where there is much more information then the first.
Links:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YSe6FT-pzDE
http://www.abcnews.go.com/International/Story?id=4600258&page=1
No comments:
Post a Comment