News Articles Analysis

Media Analysis
Name
Institution
Due Date
Media Analysis
Since time immemorial, the media, otherwise known as the fourth estate, has posed as the ears and eyes of the public. When it comes to governments, the media has managed to make sure that most governments in the world remain within the bounds of the law and constitution. On the other hand, in the private sector, the media has also been a watchdog for the public. The case at hand is a good example that captures the essence of the media as a watchdog for the public. In this analysis, a total of 10 articles are analyzed with the goal of showcasing whether the coverage was positive, negative, or neutral. Further, this analysis will showcase whether the news articles exacerbated or worsened the matter.
Of the ten articles that I examined, I determined that two articles were positive, two were neutral, and two were negative and sought to propagate a narrative that was meant to turn readers against H&M. The two positive articles were from SBSNews and the New York Post. From the start to the end of the articles, there appear to be a lot of similarities in these articles. First, the articles appear to not pick a side, and they mainly focus on providing their target audience with information regarding the case at hand. From the New York Post article written by Joshua Miller, a statement from Liam Mango’s mother is included in which she denounces the idea that H&M was being racist. After showcasing this, the article then moves on to showcasing H&M’s apology. Lastly, the article closes by giving a reaction from megastar LeBron James, who commented while showcasing support for the backlash the company was getting. In the article from SBSNews written by O’Sullivan, a similar approach is taken, whereby the article showcases Twitter’s responses to H&M’s actions. In the article, a majority of the tweets were from people who thought H&M was racist, while a few came from people who saw nothing wrong in what H&M did. I determined that these articles are positive because they do not seek to vilify H&M. Even though they provide the audience with details of the case, they are not seeking to lengthen the controversial story but simply report on the same.
On the other hand, the article from The Washington Post written by Samantha West, another from The New York Times written by Liam Stack, another from The Telegraph written by Olivia Rudgard, and lastly from the Daily News written by Christopher Brennan and Kate Feldman happen to be negative. I found these articles negative because they were both propagating a narrative that either H&M has perennially made this mistake or that fashion brands are becoming more racist. In West’s article, she starts by providing a brief background story to the case at hand. She then proceeds to offer her audience four examples where H&M has been found culpable or negligent in a few issues. She includes cultural appropriation, racial insensitivity, clothing waste, and failures to improve H&M factories in Asia. In Liam’s article, he starts the article by giving the background to the case and includes H&M’s apology regarding its negligence actions. However, the articl...