The Paris Climate Conference and the subsequent Accord was a big step forward by the governments of the world in combatting climate change. Most of the objective journalists that reported on it made sure not to show their enthusiasm and they highlighted the issues that still remained with putting the Accord into place. The different journalists that reported on the event came at it from a different point of view because of their ideology and also because of their target audience. One difference in the perspectives of the organizations covered is the focus that each put on the event. The focus sets the tone and it also shows the ideology behind the way the event is reported about. These differences show that the ideology that organizations have …show more content…
The New York Times is known for being a liberal newspaper so it is possible that they felt that the Accords did not go far enough. They also spend a lot of attention on the domestic situation in the United States. For example, they mention how the Republican congress had made it difficult to implement Obama’s clean energy plans. Furthermore, there is an overall look at what needs to be done to really affect climate change and if these things are being done. Lastly, the article examines how the accord will affect the developing countries and whether or not it is realistic to think that they will get any help from this accord. It is clear that the authors are practicing objective journalism because they went to Paris for the signing and spoke to many different people involved from around the world, however they did not present views that climate change is not happening. This shows that they are not falling for the tricks made by “balanced journalists” that claim they want to look at the controversy and not the actual …show more content…
Just like The New York Times article, it was mostly biased toward providing information for American readers. It also looked at the domestic policies in the country and how politics affected it. The article was objective in that it gave information on what the accord would do, who signed it, and what the challenges were. Nonetheless, the same US-centered idea that was in The New York Times was also found in this article. It sounded as if the whole agreement would collapse if the United States backed out of it. CNN has the ideology that the United States is still the only leader in the world, and they almost completely ignore the role of China, the EU, and Japan in being able to shape events. It also did not place much importance on the United Nations and the influence that it