Comparison Of The Articles About Hurricanes And People
The New York Times article has their article under a subcategory of the science section called “Climate & Environment”. Under that section, most of the articles appear to be solely related to science. Many of the – based on the titles – seem to discuss ways of alternative energy from several different parts of the world. One thing to note is that there are occasional articles relating to politics, mostly Trump and/or the Trump Administration and how they affect environmental laws and whatnot. Fox News had their article under their “Hurricanes/Typhoons” section. Most of the articles are about Hurricane Florence and Hurricane Kirk, especially the ones from this past week. However, much like TNYT, has a few articles regarding Trump. One difference to note is that the titles of articles pertaining to Trump are about him visiting aid centers and showing interest in helping those affected by the recent natural disasters. The articles on TNYT that are about Trump show a more negative side that makes it seem like he doesn’t have interest in helping the hurricane victims or improving the state of climate change.
The New York Times article was written by John Schwartz, who focuses mostly on science and climate articles. His bio is brief, it doesn’t talk very much about any work that he has done in the science field, other than the fact that he is a science writer (since 2000) who focuses on climate change. Fox News had Seth Borenstein of Associated Press write for them. Borenstein doesn’t appear to have a bio, but when searching his name on the AP website, he writes articles mostly pertaining to climate change, as well. Nothing shows when searching his name on the Fox News website.
Both articles differed in tone. The article on TNYT sounded much more urgent and alert, whereas Fox News’s article was a bit more stoic-sounding. Both articles also differed in length, Fox’s was significantly shorter and did not go into detail like TNYT did. TNYT article was broken up into different sections that discussed the different things that impact climate change and hurricanes. Fox’s article was brief in comparison and tried to make it seem as though Hurricane Florence was not solely caused by global warming or human interference, whereas TNYT seemed to be much more sure that human interference was a large cause of hurricanes.
Between the two, TNYT’s article was by far more detailed and thorough. It discussed the different factors that play in to climate change and cited several more sources than Fox News’s article did. They obtained information from the Census Bureau, Texas Tech, Texas A&M, and a few external websites. Fox’s article had less sources. The sources they had were mostly from universities. Fox mostly just discussed climate change in terms of temperature, rather than going into detail about how politics or humans could be affecting the Earth’s climate.6. The New York Times article seems to be more credible. Generally speaking, the more in depth in article is, the more believable it tends to be because it shows that the author put much more thought and (possibly) research into it. The New York Times also interjected politics into the article, which is a topic that many are uncomfortable discussing in regards to climate change. Their entire subsection titled “Politics and policies put people in harm’s way” discusses federal policies, comares Trump and Obama’s treatment of environmental issues, and highlighted past hurricane events. Fox News, on the other hand, did not do that very much. They mostly highlighted the environmental logistics of climate change rather than include politics.
