The Wall Street Journal and the New York Times covered a not so interesting issue regarding the government shutdown. I’m not quite sure how to describe the articles because I feel like the issue could have been discarded since the message was discarded. Basically, senate leaders met in order to resolve the nation’s debt and attempt to end the shutdown; however, no definite progress was made. NY Times writers, Michael D. Shear and Jeremy W. Peters, published: “Senators Near Fiscal Deal, but the House Is Uncertain.” WS Journal writers, Kristina Peterson and Janet Hook, published: “Senate Leaders in Striking Distance of a Deal.”
Peterson and Hook’s WSJ article seemed repetitive and boring. The article continually mentioned the progress congress is making in order to end the shutdown and debt crisis; however, I am never actually exposed to any solid progress within the article. The article does, however, mention:
“The latest proposal would reopen the government at current spending levels until Jan. 15 and extend the federal borrowing limit until early February, according to aides familiar with the talks.”
While the article does indeed cover some of the possible solutions and points made at the meeting on Monday, it still does not determine the “progress.” If anything, the article contradicts the “progress” as well as the introduction:
“WASHINGTON—Top Senate leaders said they were within striking distance of an agreement Monday to reopen the federal government and defuse a looming debt crisis just days before the U.S. could run out of money to pay its bills.”
Toward the end of the article, writers Peterson and Hook touch on the disagreements between Republicans and Democrats and, Treasury Secretary, Jacob Lew’s adds that there’s a failure of flexibility.
Peterson and Hook attempt to pacify our worries by pointing out certain ‘good’ things that have happened during the shutdown. Conversely, some of the issues mentioned were produced by previous events. Ultimately, no progress has been made, the overall meaning of the crisis has not been exposed, and the message is flawed.
NY Times; on the other hand, does not beat around the bush. Their title says it all, “Senators Near Fiscal Deal, but the House Is Uncertain.” Shear and Peters describe that a deal is on the horizon, but cannot be made until everyone is on board. Shear and Peters, essentially, state that no progress has been made in a polite way. The article takes its audience scene by scene, making for a much more intriguing and informative story. This article is not afraid to get in your face and expose the truth instead of sugarcoating it unlike the WSJ.
Shear and Peters examine the truth in the following passage:
“But the real possibility that as of Thursday the government would not be able to meet its obligations prompted grim warnings of an economic catastrophe that could ripple through stock markets, foreign capitals, corporate boardrooms, state budget offices and the bank accounts of everyday investors.”
[This article was published October 15, 2013]