After
doing some research, I found two articles about Condoleezza Rice that are
related to the war in the Middle East. Although, both articles address the war
in the Middle East, they are very different in substance and views. One is from
what is to be considered a “liberal” news outlet and the other from a
“conservative” news outlet.
The
“liberal” article I found was from the New York Times, and was called Condoleezza Rice Testifies on Urging The
Times to Not Run Article. This article focuses on how the Times was asked
to not run a story involving classified information about a plan to disrupt the
Iran nuclear program. Rice and other White House officials believed that the
release of this information would be detrimental to our national security. The
way the article is worded implies that they do not believe that White House
officials should be able to stop articles from being published, and that they
feel like Condoleezza Rice is in the wrong. “Ms. Abramson, who was the
Washington bureau chief at the time, said recently that she regretted not
pushing to publish it.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/16/us/politics/condoleezza-rice-testifies-on-urging-the-times-to-suppress-leak.html
The
“conservative” article I found was from Fox News, and was called Brian’s Exclusive Interviews With Former
Secretary Of State Condoleezza Rice. The interview covered a lot of
different things, including the war in the Middle East and why Condoleezza
feels we should have left forces in Iraq.
Condoleezza’s reasons for why we should have left forces in Iraq are
that the different tribes trusted the United States more than they trusted each
other, and having our forces leave made the military and political foundation
fall apart.
Written overview of the interview: http://radio.foxnews.com/2014/11/10/brians-exclusive-interview-with-former-secretary-of-state-condoleezza-rice/
There
were two major differences I noticed; the picture used and the language. The
New York Times used a hideous picture of Condoleezza looking very angry, and
Fox News used a picture of Condoleezza looking like an average person. The
language in the headlines alone tells you what kind of attitude towards
Condoleezza they are portraying, The New York Times headline makes it sound
like working with Condoleezza is impossible, and Fox News headline makes it
sound like working with Condoleezza is an honor.
Both articles accurately portray Condoleezza as a strong and powerful
woman. I think Fox News was generous by not saying anything negative about the
war in the Middle East and all of the issues going on over there currently. I
think it was unfair of The New York Times to depict Condoleezza Rice as a bully
that pushes innocent reporters around. If a person only saw the Fox News
article they would love Condoleezza and wouldn’t see the negatives regarding the
war in the Middle East and her involvement. If a person only read The New York
Times article they would think Condoleezza is a bully, and they wouldn’t see
all of the great things she has accomplished and done for our country.