Star Tribune
AP sources: before Mumbai attacks, 2 wives of convicted terrorist Headley spoke to authorities
Owners: The Star Tribune is owned by The Star Tribune Company. It is a company that has been in existence since 1867 and today with it's chairman of the board Michael T. Sweeney
Sources: David Headley's wives Two government officials and the New York Times, State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley
Keywords: Wives, Mumbai Attacks, FBI, U.S. Officials
New York Times
U.S. Had Warnings on Plotter of Mumbai Attack
Owners: The New York Times is owned by the The New York Times Company. It started in 1851 and it chairman of the board is Arthur Ochs Sulzberger, Jr.
Sources: American authorities, the Pakistani government, the F.B.I., ProPublica, The Washington post, Spokesman for The National Security Council, Mike Hammer, David Headley's wife.
Keywords: Mr. Headley’s wife, informant, Mumbai attacks, United States, D.E.A., terrorist
The Times of India
FBI ignored Headley wife's warning on LeT
Owners: The Times Group which is the biggest media conglomerate in India. They founded in Mumbai in 1838 and their chairman is Indu Jain.
Sources: FBI, ProPublica, Headley’s wife, US ambassador to India, Timothy Roemer
Keywords: David Headley’s wife, FBI, authorities, ProPublica, LeT
The similarities between the three pieces is they all focus on the wife’s giving the prior knowledge to the FBI and how the United State-Pakistani relations were flaw since it didn’t communicate while a situation like this went on. The differences were how they were all presented. With the Star Tribune article, it focused simply on the fact of the story and didn’t go in depth or show a lot of detail of what went on. It was basically a clear summary. Since it’s not a big story here and doesn’t relate toward Minnesotans, I felt like the Star Tribune didn’t put much effort in the story because it really just didn’t matter. With The New York Times piece, it turned out to probably be the best and most focused of the articles since it generated lot of sources. It still had summary but had some unique facts that the Star Tribune didn’t provide. With the Time of India, I felt since it was a India based newspaper, they focused less on summary and went for more hidden facts about the case and started talking to other source like the ambassador for India to see how the relationship between the US and India are working out there.
I think it is interesting to consider the lack of interest/ care within these news sources because the media often focuses on stories that they think are going to draw in the largest audiences. For Minnesota, there are many other facets of news that people will be apt to read than foreign affairs, while in New York, foreign stories are often focal to importance for audiences. Also, the audience that each specific newspaper is aimed at, not just by region but by name of the paper, is important to consider and examine. This is true with all of the posts in this project, and I think it is necessary that you touched on the idea. It could, however, be further expanded upon.
ReplyDelete