Introduction
For my first blog assignment, I was instructed to examine the election coverage by a media source of my choice. I decided to study how USA Today online reports the presidential campaigns in terms of Kathleen Hall Jamieson and Paul Waldman’s book called “The Press Effect”. The time of which I monitored the source from Saturday to Monday was between 10pm to 11pm. We have also been taught in class how to construct our argument based on Toulmin’s diagram. Therefore, I will be using his model to compose my own analysis and standpoint.
Claim and Qualifiers
In my perspective, USA Today effectively covered the election during the three days of my investigation as it has carefully engaged a wide range of approaches within its information. However, parts of the statements appear to be irrelevant to the main messages that the reporters were determined to focus on.
Grounds
I read fourteen articles from the politics section of www.usatoday.com/ overall. Nine of the fourteen articles included several surveys and polls to inform the reader about which presidential candidate was leading before and which one has now taken the front spot. The various fluctuations of the public’s votes and the way the reporters take significant account of them carry out the format of a horserace. Along with the horserace layout, news writers followed the polls with strategies that the candidates need to execute to acquire victory. Those two features make the articles slide under the “soothsayer” role. However, most of the stories have also fused the role of both the “custodian of fact” and the “press as storyteller” together. Those individual news reporters incorporated pieces of history and biography of each candidate in their articles, which is what the role of the custodian of fact carries out. Additionally, they personally selected certain details of their preferences in order to express their desired concept. This doing represents the trait of the “press as storyteller” role. One of the articles directed more toward the role of the “press as psychologist”. It used a few phrases of “seemed to” as it talked about particular people’s behaviors and feelings in the campaign. The usage of expressions such as “seemed to” implies the act of supposing, which isn’t a fact.
Although each reporter’s article contains bits and pieces of the many roles from “The Press Effect” book, they all have one big similarity. Every one of them entails numerous word-for-word quotes from the presidential candidates, their running mates, as well as the public. Some news writers don’t just put out the facts and details and leave it at that. They also strengthen their gathered information by giving an analysis of certain parts. A few of the articles don’t quite stick to their primary focus as they deviate to mention other facts that the audience wouldn’t need to know about. Those unrelated pieces of information could only serve for the purpose of quick, short entertainment. One example is in an article that concentrated on Sarah Palin’s speech in Ohio. At the end of the description of her discourse, the reporter decides to add the fact that she went to a local farmer’s market to buy some apple cider. This random inclusion may be purely for fun detail and to release the seriousness of the topic.
Warrant
Since the articles possess so many little chunks of each various role in Jamieson’s and Waldman’s book, they are found to have more diversity and description. They are less bias as well. The reporters do not disregard the opinions of any groups of people. Children under the age of 18 are even included in the reports about the election as there was a completely separate survey for them to vote on. Furthermore, each article consisted of both the Republicans’ and the Democrats’ points of view. Some reporters’ objectives were to discuss one specific party, but they considerately brought up the reactions and counterattacks of the other party as well.
Backing
Although I believe that the “custodian of fact” is the most important role out of all the other possible ones, it’s even better when an article is able to enfold a mixture of the four roles excluding the “press as patriot”. Integrating all four makes the story well-rounded. As a voter, the person would want to know every angle and aspect of the running candidates such as their personalities, their beliefs and policies, and their history in order to make a greater educated decision. Perhaps even fragments of irrelevant information can be included like a couple of the articles that I read. The irrelevance may not seem fully professional at times, but it can also work in some cases. In this election, it does seem to serve a purpose for the reader if they wish to know more about the candidates and their personal tastes. That shouldn’t be taken into consideration toward which person to vote for, however.
