News Comparisons

Rebecca Beaudry
HIS 3106
Comparing News
April 9, 2009

A United States Container Ship was attacked by Somali pirates. The pirates were repelled by the crew, but not before they managed to take the captain of the ship hostage. The story as reported by Al Jazeera and the Washington Post are vastly different, though both cover the same event.
The Al Jazeera article, “U.S. crew repel pirates off Somalia” focuses on the crew of the ship which had been attacked and the captain of the ship who had been taken hostage. In the Al Jazeera article, only one crew member, the third mate, is mentioned by name in relation to what he had said to the Associated Press about the crew’s attempts to negotiate with the pirates. They also had a quote from Hillary Clinton.
Unlike the Washington Post article, the Al Jazeera article mentions that part of the ship’s cargo is food aid from the United Nations. This food is meant for Somalia and Uganda. The Washington Post article spoke more about the owners of the shipping company and what they intended to do.
The Al Jazeera article also speaks briefly about the United States Navy warship, the Bainbridge, which came to the aid of the crew and later pursued the pirates. It did not speak about the hostage situation beyond that the pirates had escaped with the captain in one of the lifeboats.
At the end of the Al Jazeera article, the rise in piracy, particularly off the coast of Somalia is briefly spoken about. It does not go into detail, rather, it mentions several incidents by name of the ship and country of origins of the ship or the pirates or location of the piracy and various demands for ransom by pirates.
The Washington Post article, titled “FBI Hostage Negotiators Helping Navy With Ship Captain’s Rescue” takes a much different approach. The article focuses on what the United States military is doing in relation to the pirates. Likewise, it focuses on the additional guards added to the crew of the ship to ensure it arrived in Somalia safely.
It is not until halfway through the article that it mentions that the unarmed crew managed to wrest control of the ship from the pirates. The Washington Post article, does not, however, mention that the crew was unarmed as the Al Jazeera article did.
However, it does speak of the hostage situation in detail. It is described so vividly that it can be clearly pictured by readers. However, the description of the situation is such that it raises alarm for the captain of the ship in ways that the Al Jazeera article did not.
Like the Al Jazeera article, the Washington Post article had a quote from Hillary Clinton. However, the Washtington Post’s quote was on how the hostage situation was being closely monitored. The Al Jazeera quote was about how Clinton wanted countries to work together to end “the scourge of piracy.” These quotes give readers completely different feelings. While the Washington Post quote gives one the feeling that the incident is of so little concern that it is merely being monitored, the Al Jazeera quote gives the reader the feeling that piracy is a global problem. The Washington Post begins the article by describing the continuing hostage situation which is the focus of the article for the first two pages. It describes an almost movie like chase right out of Hollywood where the Navy chased down and cornered the pirates in the lifeboat they’d stolen. Even the quote from Capt. Joseph Murphy reflects this. He describes something out of an old western where the pirates have “nowhere to run; there’s nowhere to hide.”
The United States has a history of glorifying piracy even as it vilifies it. This is reflected by how the Washington Post described the pirates. They were referred to as “shrewd businessmen” or “daring opportunists” making piracy seem almost acceptable. Even with the mitigating effect of the word “opportunists,” the word daring makes them seem much more worth emulating. The piracy is even decribed as “spectacular,” although this seems to be more in relation to how they pulled off their acts of piracy than anything else.
Yet still the descriptions make it clear that though piracy is a bad thing, it is also something to be emulated. It makes it clear that the author is, if only subconsciously, comparing these pirates to the pirates American culture has turned into heroes. The article sends mixed messages in that it uses words which makes piracy sound good and heroic, yet essentially says that piracy is bad.
Unlike the Washington Post, Al Jazeera does not make piracy sound heroic. However, neither does it vilify piracy. Rather, it makes it clear that piracy is wrong and criminal without going overboard in either direction. It makes it sound like a virulent global problem. Yet it is still presented almost as a force of nature.
The Washington Post ends their article in the same manner Al Jazeera did, by talking about the recent upsurge in piracy on a global scale. However, the Washington Post makes it seem as if piracy is merely an increasing problem off the coast of Somalia, rather than world wide. Ti describes numerous incidents off the coast of Somalia while making it clear that the United States Navy does not have enough ships to patrol the waters while making it seem almost as if it is the fault of the leader of Somalia that there is so much piracy.
The Somali president is described as a “moderate Islamist.” This description alone is problematic. Considering how little information they gave about the man, it is inappropriate to mention that as if it would explain everything about his political views and the like.
The Al Jazeera article serves only to inform people about an incident of piracy while the Washinton Post article both vilifies and praises piracy. What the articles chose to cover and how they chose to do so adds to these opposing views.
http://english.aljazeera.net/news/africa/2009/04/20094823514902293.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/04/09/AR2009040901304.html?hpid%3Dtopnews&sub=AR