This week, House members voted to censure Arizona Representative Paul Gosar for a violent video he posted to Twitter. Here is how a few mass media outlets covered the story:
Leans toward the right:
Breitbart: Cheney, Kinzinger Vote to Remove Paul Gosar from Committee Assignments
A major thing that stands out about this headline is that it is not very clear. It never explains who Paul Gosar is or why he is being censured. Instead, it focuses on how two House Republicans voted in favor of removing Gosar from his committee assignments, and based on the content of the article this is because the author considers their actions a betrayal of their fellow Republican. The article even characterizes Representatives Cheney and Kinzinger as “so-called Republicans.” If you ask me, this is a fairly rude way to refer to members of Congress, especially when the article’s argument is that they disrespected another member of Congress. Additionally, in describing the situation, the article only mentions that “Democrats accused Gosar of inciting violence” for tweeting an anime video of AOC being killed and fails to mention that the video also attacked President Biden. They only report half of the story, specifically the portion that their audience will most “agree” with. It’s particularly interesting because this was the only current mention of Representative Gosar and his censure that I could find on the Breitbart website. This is definitely not a well-balanced, informative take on this news story.
Trends toward the center:
The New York Times: House, Mostly Along Party Lines, Censures Gosar for Violent Video
This headline does a better job explaining the situation than the previous one. Though it doesn’t directly identify Gosar as a House Representative, it doesn’t need to since it mentions that the House censured him. That he’s a member becomes self-explanatory at that point. The article does a thorough job of summarizing the situation, but I did notice lots of dramatic, emotional language that painted the action more like a movie scene than something taking place in a Congressional chamber. That said, it features the viewpoints of each party, not siding with one over the other. It also provides a fair amount of background regarding the House’s history of censuring members, demonstrating that it is an uncommon occurrence reserved for serious offenses. Ultimately, this article is a great read, especially for someone looking to get all the information they need about this story from a non-biased source.
Leans toward the left:
This is the most comprehensive of the three headlines. It includes Gosar’s title as well as the reason he is being censured. Content-wise, this article is shorter than the others but it includes a concise summary of Gosar’s situation. The reason why he was censured is included, as well as the results of the vote, and the committees he will be removed from. I really appreciate the ‘what this means’ section at the end of the article, which explains that a censure resolution is the most severe form of punishment in the House. That makes up for the lack of history on previous censures that other articles include. Overall, this is a quick read and is helpful for those who want to catch up on the situation but don’t have the time for an in-depth take on it.
My balanced take:
This week, Republican House Representative Paul Gosar became the first sitting member in 11 years to be censured by his fellow Representatives. Censure is a punishment that strips the member from their committee assignments, essentially removing the bulk of their power. Gosar received his censure because of a violent anime video he posted to Twitter, in which a cartoon version of him killed Representative Alexandria Ocasio Cortez and attacked President Biden. The vote was 223-207-3, with Republicans Kinzinger and Cheney joining Democrats in voting in favor of the censure. Gosar has responded by defending the video and claiming that Democrats are trying to cancel him.
This was a very thorough and informative post regarding the recent censorship of Rep. Gosar. I appreciate how you worked up to the most informative headline that did its best to showcase all relevant information as opposed to the other two news stories that spoon fed their audience what they want from headlines. I posted about Gosar as well but your focus on the headlines made this an interesting read.
ReplyDeleteWe have learned this semester that politics and the media go hand in hand in shaping consumers view of what is happening in our country. Your description of the 3 different articles with 3 different political really proved this. If you read the Breitbart article, you would think Rep. Gosar's video wasn't very bad and you wouldn't understand the severity of a representative being censured, but if you read the CNN, you would understand the severity of Rep. Gosar's video and what it means to be censured. I really enjoyed reading your post.
ReplyDelete