지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
The 2009 presidential election in the Islamic Republic of Iran, which resulted in a landslide victory for the incumbent President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, was extensively covered by the Western media. Three leading American news providers presented the two main presidential candidates very differently. One was portrayed as enlightened and moderate, while the other was depicted as crude and irrational. While in the United States it is widely believed that the media is relatively credible in the way it presents the news,critics often believe that the U.S. media is Orientalist in the way it approaches non-Western countries and especially Muslim countries. According to critics, countries that are politically at odds with the United States, such as Iran, are presented in an almost completely negative light. In this article,election coverage from the New York Times, The Washington Post, as well as the CNN website is analyzed to determine the approach these news agencies took to the presidential election as well as the degree to which they stuck to the facts on the ground. The paper concludes that all three media outlets were highly biased in their coverage and that they regularly dismissed or ignored facts while repeatedly making claims that were unsubstantiated.
목차
등록된 정보가 없습니다.
참고문헌 (25)
참고문헌 신청
이 논문의 저자 정보
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0