UPI Headliine Bias?
A March 17 UPI article on new Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff's first public speech is entitled, "Analysis: Homeland Security Fumbling Threat Assessment."
The article, by UPI Homeland & National Security Editor Shaun Waterman, presents itself as an objective news story (which, in all fairness, it seems to be). What is mystifying is the article's misleading and prejudicial headline. The article contains no analysis that I can discern, and negative opinions on various national security issues are balanced with positive ones. Nor does the word "fumbling" (or any remotely-related synomyn) appear anywhere within the article.
It is well-known that headlines convey stronger impressions to the casual reader than the articles themselves. Why is UPI seemingly trying to misrepresent and spin an article in a manner that reflects badly on the Bush administration?
Can anyone out there help me on this?
The article, by UPI Homeland & National Security Editor Shaun Waterman, presents itself as an objective news story (which, in all fairness, it seems to be). What is mystifying is the article's misleading and prejudicial headline. The article contains no analysis that I can discern, and negative opinions on various national security issues are balanced with positive ones. Nor does the word "fumbling" (or any remotely-related synomyn) appear anywhere within the article.
It is well-known that headlines convey stronger impressions to the casual reader than the articles themselves. Why is UPI seemingly trying to misrepresent and spin an article in a manner that reflects badly on the Bush administration?
Can anyone out there help me on this?
posted by Bird of Paradise at 4:24 PM
<< Home