CNN and Fox News had very different articles on the Bush administration moving to open up 58.5 million acres of national forest areas for possible logging, mining, etc. I was surprised at the biases represented in the articles. Here are four examples of word choices that show biases, with Fox being more pro-administration and CNN more from the environmentalist side:
1. Is the glass half-full or half-empty? Did President Clinton’s decision “protect” the forests or “limit development?
CNN: … which President Clinton had set aside for protection, …
FOX: … had been put off limits to development by former President Clinton, …
2. Fox makes it sound like the land is merely “remote” while CNN uses the term “untouched” which has a very different connotation.
CNN: The last 58.5 million acres of untouched national forests, …
FOX: … nearly a third of all remote national forest lands …
3. Fox has the area as “roadless” while CNN uses “most pristine.”
CNN: New rules from the U.S. Forest Service cover some of the most pristine federal land in 38 states and
FOX: Roadless areas in national forests stretch among 38 states and
4. CNN says the 9th
CNN: The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals has upheld
FOX: A federal court in
Incidentally, although Fox does have some opposing views, only CNN includes opposing quotes from two Democrats, Senator Clinton (D-NY) and Rep. Udall (D-CO).
Links to the articles: