The researcher, as titled by the source, PolitFact, spends little time addressing the recent coup in Egypt that the Representatives addressed during the press conference, highlights one short statement made by Michelle Bachmann, and spends the majority of the article providing information, as well as some historical context, relevant to Bachmann's mentioned statement. The researcher uses the information and context she provides to hint that Bachmann once again performed poorly in the public arena.
The researcher's claim, that Bachmann comes off as an uneducated public speaker, is never explicitly stated, but hinted at when she questions Bachmann's speech:
"Was Bachmann blaming the Muslim Brotherhood for the 9/11 attacks? Or, was she making a more general statement that both Egypt and the United States should fight extremists?"This claim is also hinted at when she writes "Bachmann's comments struck us as open to interpretation." This comment made by the researcher also shows her to be a biased writer, offering her opinion on the matter. However, because PolitiFact does not call itself a news source, the writer's inclusion of her opinion is not unethical. The rest of the article is spent explaining the Muslim Brotherhood, Al-Qaida and 9/11, and offers a short commentary about the differences between them and why some might associate the two together.
Although the implicit claim I mentioned previously is present in the article, I think the researcher's main goal was to offer insight on the subject and used Bachmann's statement as a starting point. With this claim and then information or evidence offered, the researcher was successful in further educating me, the audience.
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2013/sep/11/michele-bachmanns-comments-911-and-muslim-brotherh/
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.