BBC vs. CNN

When I chose to compare a news article from BBC News to one of the same subject from CNN, I assumed there would be a difference in the way the information was relayed. I chose an article involving the United States to note the viewpoint each news source took on the subject. Although I expected that, naturally, the American news site would favor Americans and the British news site would berate them, it turned out to be the opposite.

The articles I chose concerned the U.S. Supreme Court refusing to hear a case involving a man kidnapped and tortured by the CIA. The first major difference I noticed was the length, which I had expected. The article from CNN is much longer and more in-depth than the brief summary given by BBC News. This difference is unsurprising, simply because the article involves the United States, so logically, an American news source would include more information on it, because it affects that audience more.

Another important difference is each article’s standpoint on the United States. BBC New’s article is fairly unbiased, simply presenting the information for interpretation. The only negative portrayal of the U.S. occurs when the article describes the man’s flight to Afghanistan, which involved being “stripped, beaten, [and] shackled.” The CNN article does not include these details, but it is much harsher on the American government by including such details as, “U.S. officials told CNN the Bush administration privately has confirmed to Germany the man was captured by mistake, but it has not made a public admission.” But who needs a public admission when you have CNN?