tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2127857726799826159.post1962432677024904162..comments2023-04-17T08:23:06.509-07:00Comments on Journalism History: The Chernobyl DisasterVenisehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17316683833475702021noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2127857726799826159.post-32151044830788831332009-04-06T22:52:00.000-07:002009-04-06T22:52:00.000-07:00I forgot to post the sources the first time but th...I forgot to post the sources the first time but they're up there now if you want to check out the articles.<BR/><BR/>:)nightnday99https://www.blogger.com/profile/17489901388572666891noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2127857726799826159.post-83904340841785820202009-04-06T15:37:00.000-07:002009-04-06T15:37:00.000-07:00Well, to me, the first article sounds more like an...Well, to me, the first article sounds more like an opinion piece rather than a hard news story, primarily due to a quote you singled out. As for the author's "perspective," it is not uncommon to find it in print and broadcast of that time, especially in regards to the Soviet Union. After all, the foreign policy of both countries were influenced by decades of hostility and mirror-imaging, a.k.a. the Cold War. At this point, it is not unsafe to conclude, that the press of that period reflected the prevailing zeitgeist. And in this case, because the writer partially relied on official reports (chiefs of staff, according to the article), it is not surprising that the coverage was a bit tainted. Overall, like any other government, the US officials tend to present otherwise raw and unfiltered information in a way that will play along with their agenda.dani hellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00300035279623137855noreply@blogger.com