This essay is essentially an investigation of some of the ways that the various methods used in reporting the news can, and do, dramatically affect the way that we (the reader, or listener, or viewer) perceive what we have just seen or heard. I propose that this is manipulation pure and simple, and intend to present several examples to bear out this hypothesis. In presenting these articles, I will deconstruct, or examine some of the components of the writing and attempt to discover the mechanism of the “spin” machine.

The first article that I chose to deconstruct to show a couple of the ways a news story can be crafted to influence our opinions as readers, is a CNET article written by Declan McCullagh about the possibility of local and state law enforcement agencies using pilotless “drone” aircraft to conduct surveillance over American cities. This interesting article was fairly straightforward, but did have a considerable spin in a couple of obvious ways.

Let’s start with the headline and first sentence (lead line) of the piece for what I think is a good example of snarl/purr, which is a technique whereby an author changes the reader's opinion by being intentionally positive or negative in their descriptions. I think that there are also overlapping examples of effective connotation, where the author uses emotionally loaded words to sway or influence the reader.

The headline reads: “Drone aircraft may prowl U.S. skies.” The word “prowl” is very evocative, and in my opinion serves the purpose of creating a negative image in the mind of the reader. Interestingly, it appears that the writer approves of the use of these types of aircraft for military purposes overseas. Mr. McCullagh follows his dark headline with the following lead-in to the rest of the story: “Unmanned aerial vehicles have soared the skies of Afghanistan and Iraq for years, spotting enemy encampments, protecting military bases, and even launching missile attacks against suspected terrorists.” If I went no further in this article, what I have just read would leave me with the impression that while Mr. McCullagh sees these aircraft as useful and beneficial over the battlefield, that he has serious reservations about their use to survey the domestic populace. The specific examples of snarl/purr and effective connotation that I referred to were the words “prowl” in the headline, and “soared” in the lead-in.

I hope that I am right in thinking that the next excerpt is a good example of affectiveness of fact. Affectiveness of fact is the device used by some journalists to manipulate their audience by using vivid or lurid descriptions to create a desired impression. The author writes: “In a scene that could have been inspired by the movie "Minority Report," one North Carolina county is using a UAV equipped with low-light and infrared cameras to keep watch on its citizens. The aircraft has been dispatched to monitor gatherings of motorcycle riders at the Gaston County fairgrounds from just a few hundred feet in the air--close enough to identify faces--and many more uses, such as the aerial detection of marijuana fields, are planned.” I don’t think that I could find a better example in this story of Mr. McCullagh using an emotionally loaded, vivid description to sway me (the reader).

As to the motive for McCullagh, or CNET itself desiring the reader to be apprehensive about the possibility of domestic surveillance, I have to think that they are pandering to the slightly left-of-center demographic that makes up the majority of their readers. It is in their best interest to foster a climate of apprehension, as there are sure to be stories to follow.

The second example article is a story about our illustrious Secretary of Defense, and has a couple of excellent incidents of “effective connotation.” This story was taken from the Sunday Oregonian, in the national news section. The article, titled “Rumsfeld criticism tests sense of duty” written by Scott Shane of the New York Times News Service, attempts to put the recent criticism of the Secretary of Defense by several retired military higher-ups, in perspective based on the historical relationship between the military and the civilians in charge of the military who also represent the people of the United States.

There are many examples of journalistic techniques used to direct or influence the reader in general, but I will note a couple of specific examples that I found rather pointed. I’ll cite a couple examples of effective connotation first. Actually, the more that I look at these, they could also be examples of manipulation of context since I don’t have any way to know how much the author edited the quotes that he chose to use. Manipulation of context is taking a portion of a statement or quote out of context to fit the writer's thematic needs. Mr. Shane quotes a Mr. Richard Kohn, a historian at the University of North Carolina who has “studied the civilian control issue for 40 years." First he states that Kohn said that he found the attacks (by the Generals) “disquieting”, and he quotes Kohn who remarks on the comment of a certain Major General, as saying, “That’s a fairly chilling thought… chilling because they’re not supposed to be undermining their civilian leadership.” Shane reports that Kohn goes on to say that he feared the public statements would “poison the civil-military relationship inside the Pentagon and with the President.” So he (Shane) makes a point of allowing Kohn’s fears to be shared with the reader. He also implies that the problem is bigger than just discontent on the part of some retired generals, but goes all the way through our Congressional- military complex, and into the White House as well.

The overall thesis of the article is that General Peter Pace, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff did the only thing that he could do when he defended Rumsfeld publicly last week, because he had a historical mandate to do so. That when the former generals criticized the Secretary of Defense openly last week and called for his resignation, that they ran the risk of eroding American’s belief that the military stands apart from politics.

Frankly, I personally have never thought that the military stood apart from politics, particularly when I was a member of it. For me there is no question as to the motive for the slant in this article on the part of the Oregonian. The fact that the majority of the of the paper's customers live in Portland, and overwhelmingly poll as moderate-to-liberal politically, is certainly motivation enough for a for-profit business. The record of the political candidates that the Oregonian chooses to endorse during election years would tend to bear this out as well.

This leads us to the last article which I found at the Times Online ( the web presence of The Times of London, England) web site, and I saved the best headline for last. The third story that I chose to deconstruct is titled “God made me cancel my own crucifixion”, which pretty much spells out why I chose it. “Affectiveness of fact” leaks all over the page in this story about a reporter from the U.K. who for personal (and seemingly professional also) reasons decides to go on a religious pilgrimage which will end in the Philippines, when the reporter is ritually crucified along with many other religious devotees. It turns out that at the last minute the reporter, one Dominik Diamond, decided not to go through with the crucifixion, but instead claimed “God wanted me only to pray at the foot of my cross.”

The first paragraph has a bit of a snarly tone, when the author of the article, Nico Hines, states that the “British broadcaster who travelled to the Philippines to be crucified on Good Friday for a television programme pulled out of the stunt in tears yesterday — and blamed God for his decision.” From that point on I think that the rest of the article is a consistent example of affectiveness of fact.

There are some examples of the author pointedly guiding us toward an opinion. The following couple of sentences are a great example of “effective connotation”, when the author chooses a couple of fairly “loaded” words. “Negotiations had taken place to bestow on Diamond the privilege of becoming only the second Westerner to take part in the event, known as Karabrio. The ceremony is held in the village of Cutud, 50 miles (80km) north of Manila. Men dress in white robes and flagellate themselves with glass-tipped paddles and bamboo whips, in penitence for their sins.” Mr. Hines carefully chose to use the terms “bestow” and “privilege” when referring to Diamond’s upcoming ordeal. He also graphically describes how men “flagellate themselves with glass-tipped paddles and bamboo whips.” All of this contributes to the sense of intensity of the moment, and gives the reader a reason to empathize with Diamond regarding his decision to abort his plan. As to the reasons that The Times chose to take the stance that they did on this story may be manifold. The most obvious to me is that sensationalism sells papers. But I also think there may be a little bit of defensiveness on the part of the paper regarding a fellow journalist who was being characterized as a coward.