Tuesday morning CBS had an interview with democratic frontrunner Hillary Clinton which sparked some attention while answering a question in regards to her closeness with Wall Street, along with how it would effect her potential to becoming the president. She responded by saying:
“‘I have stood for a lot of regulation on big banks and on the financial services sector,…I also represented New York and represented everybody from the dairy farmers you know to the fishermen. Everybody. And so, yes, do I know people and did I, you know, help rebuild after 9/11? Yes, I did.'”
Many consider this odd due to the fact that she just mentioned her progress with 9/11 in the second democratic debate, many argue in an extremely awkward and strange way. Though the point is valid, after analyzing the story from Fox News and ABC I get a much different feel within the different outlets.
The ABC story titled “Hillary Clinton Invokes 9/11 for the 2nd Time in Defending Wall Street Ties Against Critics” they very briefly describe the event, not spending time talking about their feelings towards the subject. They did at the end quote Martin O’Malley’s campaign manager Lis Smith on twitter, criticizing Clinton’s words, but not much else. The article had very little bias, if any.
The Fox News story titled “Clinton again invokes 9/11 to justify Wall Street ties” tried to do the same as the ABC story, in the sense of avoiding bias, but failed in many aspects. The language in the article was slightly hostile, unlike the ABC story. The ABC story used language such as “Clinton first mentioned the 9/11 attacks on New York to defend herself against Wall Street ties…” while Fox used more hostile language such as “Clinton’s comments echoed controversial remarks she made…”. Though this is a small aspect of the article, it gives a big insight into the differences between the articles.
The last thing I noticed that was much different between the ABC and Fox article was the endings. ABC ended with the quote from Smith about her opinion towards the comments Clinton made. The ending was awkward, but gave an interesting look on the subject that makes the readers think critically about Clintons comments on 9/11. The Fox ending changed the subject completely. Out of the blue they put in a quote about how Clinton mentioned in an interview that she would never put troops on the ground in Syria. One can assume it is a tactic to get people to dislike Clinton and her policies more, but overall it is strange and unneeded.
Overall the differences in the articles are small, but when analyzed in a political and critical manner one can see how the small differences can say the most.