Was Reporting Fair: CRITICAL MEDIA LITERACY IN TIMES OF WAR

-- Critical Media Literacy
in Times of War

-- Introduction to the Site
-- Modules

-- Afghanistan
-- Introduction
-- Background
-- Media Coverage
-- How Many Protested?
-- Crowd Size Sept. '01
-- Crowd Size April '02
-- Was Reporting Fair?
(you are here)
-- Comparing Reports
-- Comparing Reports, con't
-- Why Underreporting?
-- Tones and Headlines, Sept. '01 protests
-- Tones and Headlines, April '02 protests
-- Comparing Positions
-- Civilian Casualties
-- How Many Civilians Died?
-- Tones and Headlines
-- U.S. Raid, Oct 11, 2001
-- U.S. Raid, Oct 11, 2001 con't
-- U.S. Raid, Oct 11, 2001, part 3
-- Was the Media Told?
-- Networks Follow Orders!

THE "WAR ON TERROR"

Did the mainstream news report fairly on the number of protesters at the anti-war rallies in Washington DC in September 2001 and April 2002?

TRUE?	What can account for the large differences between the reported estimates? Perhaps the articles used different sources? If so, what were those sources? What does the choice of source suggest about bias in the reporting or the positionality of the reporter?
FALSE?	The large differences between the reported estimates probably suggested to you that different sources were being used for the estimates. The choice of source, of course, may be a point at which bias can enter reporting.

<Previous: Crowd Sizes, Wash. DC Anti-War Rally, April, 2002>

<Next: Comparing Reports>

Site Index

Credits

Contact Us

Last updated. July 6, 2003