Post #2: prompt 1

The news story that I chose is the Dakota Pipeline issue that has been debated and covered heavily since at least late July this year. It is the issue of whether a 1,172 mile long pipeline carrying oil all the way from North Dakota to Southern Illinois should go through the Standing Rock Sioux Reservation in North Dakota. The Native Americans there and many other supporters have been protesting this construction for fear that it endangers their water supply and interferes with many of their cultural sites, as well as endangers the overall environment because of possible oil leaks. People are on the other side, supporting the construction of the pipeline and opposing these protests because the company has all the legal permissions to build it, the protests are becoming dangerous for those protesting, and this is halting important infrastructure for the United States.

The first news source that I chose was the New York Times which tends to be a more liberal source of information. It was an article posted December 5th after the decision by the government to postpone the construction, and used much language to connect with the liberal audience they were most likely targeting. Examples of this are things such as the use of words with heavy connotations such as "defied" in the statement: "On Monday, many protesters defied an order by the Army Corps of Engineers to leave a campsite north of the Cannonball River." By saying that they "defied" the order instead of maybe "disobeyed" or "didn't follow" it, the author is attempting to target this audience that generally tends to want to help and stand up for those that have been poorly treated in the past or recently, the Native Americans definitely being one of those groups of people. Also the use of this word "defied" could be perceived by a more conservative audience as negative and shameful because of their tendencies to support the pipeline and the people protecting and building it.This article also used most of their quotes from liberal people in politics and the Native Americans/protesters. Overall, the message you could take away from this article was that the stopping of construction of this pipeline was a positive and joyful achievement, as well as a step in the right direction. 

The next source that I read was Fox News, which tends to be a more conservative source of information. The article that I read was on the same exact issue, posted on the same day, but was very different in its message and word choice. One example is when it said "The decision handed a victory to the Standing Rock Sioux tribe and its supporters...",  using the phrase "handed a victory" to imply that nobody was fighting for the cause of the pipeline and that this was a horrible mistake. In doing that they are targeting a large population of conservatives who stereotypically are displeased with the current government. Later in the article this is also clearly stated when it said:"The company building the pipeline, Dallas-based Energy Transfer Partners, slammed President Obama’s administration in a statement, calling the move political." This statement attempting to rally on the general hate of the Obama Administration within many conservatives. Overall this article used one quote from any Native Americans or liberal people and many different quotes from various conservative government officials such as Paul Ryan. While casting a very negative light on this decision and its meaning in America.