Sources Response

In the online New York Times article published on the 18^th of February titled ‘Security Forces In Bahrain Open Fire On Mourners’ (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/19/world/middleeast/19bahrain.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&hp) the sources employed by Michael Slackman and Nadim Audi prove interesting when considered in light of portraying an accurate depiction of a source. On analyzing the article through this lense the first two specific sources quoted are both Sheikh Salman bin Hamad al-Khalifa, the Prince of Bahrain, followed by President Barrack Obama. Both quotes can be seen as legitimate as both quotes are contextualized by the authors: Khalifa’s statement attributed to a public statement made on “…Bahrain TV to call for calm…” and America’s “president made the remarks in a statement read to reporters traveling with him on a domestic trip on Air Force One, according to the Associated Press.” Both sources can be seen as being quoted for a few different reasons but most probably used to illustrate the magnitude of the issue through putting the statements in context of international relations. Both the Associated Press and a public statement broadcast prove ‘reliable’, one through familiarity (the Associated Press), the other through it probably having a concrete recording of the statement on video, most probably made available on youtube, thus easily attainable, probably moments after it’s broadcast.

The next source employed in the article: “Have you seen what they have done to us,” said Aayat Mandeel, 29, a computer technician. “Killing people for what? To keep their positions?” This source proves different to the previous as it used in a different way and attributed to a witness at the actual event, thus inspiring a different relationship over authenticity between the source and the reader. The reader is potentially less inclined to trust the quoted account based on unfamiliarity with the speaker. I find the use of Aayat Mandeel’s statement in the article to be functioning no more than as a powerful representation of the brutality witnessed misplaced within the article, thus interrupting the flow of the article. The integration of both Khalifa and Obama was applied more effectively through the author’s contextualization.

In a lighter article titled ‘Annandale civic association elects dog as president’ by Brigid Schulte which appeared on the Washington Post website, also on the 18^th of February, (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/02/18/AR2011021803522.html?hpid=topnews) the sources are utilized in an alternate manner based purely on the nature and gravity of the news itself. A quote from the president dog’s newsletter revealing what tricked it’s way to becoming president of Annandale Civic Association, Ms. Bertha Lee, reading: “…"govern with an even paw." The dog's photo appeared under the heading, "Dog Rules, Humans Apathetic (Pathetic)."” The nature of the news, though not as grave as that of the news communicated in ‘Security Forces In Bahrain Open Fire On Mourners’ holds the similar values of contextualization as Slackman and Audi’s use of both Khalifa and Obama’s statements. However, the nature of the news, a small local issue as opposed to a more pressing international issue alters the relationship slightly between the source, the author, and the reader. The author’s position as controller of information available to the reader is changed due to the quasi-comical qualities of how much the average reader will be interested in such a niched topic.