The New York Times vs. The Guardian on the U.S. Economy
On Friday, February 1, 2013, the New York Times and The Guardian published stories on the United States’ current situation regarding job growth and increasing unemployment. The Guardian provides and compares a variety of statistics between the past and present, while the New York Times solely provides current figures. The New York Times’ has a pessimistic position towards the situation and does not give any insight for hope of an improving economy. Catherine Rampell, the article’s author, uses harsh diction against the United States’ economy and the Obama administration. Similarly, The Guardian has a negative position on the US economy; however, it is written in a more sensible way and does not include any opinionated words with antagonistic connotations.
The articles’ introductory statements reveal opposite attitudes towards the issue. The New York Times introduces its article with a pessimistic comment: “Political gridlock over fiscal policy didn’t push the economy off a cliff. But it certainly isn’t helping anything, either.” (Rampell) On the other hand, The Guardian begins its article by being straightforward and provides a percentile statistic: “The US unemployment rate edged up to 7.9% in January as the number of new jobs came in below expectations, in a further indication of the fragility of the economic recovery.” (Rushe) The New York Times’ introduction is sarcastic and opinionated, while The Guardian is more direct in getting the story told.
The New York Times and The Guardian uses different methods of presenting facts and interviews. The New York Times gives the basic gist on the issue, provides a few statistics and includes a few quotes excerpted from interviews with the executive director of the National Employment Law Project and an unemployed woman from Massachusetts, who has been struggling to get a job for a year and a half. The Guardian informs its readers with estimated numbers and...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document