The different angles media outlets take on an international story
On the weekend of September 20th, the world discovered the destruction caused by a truck bomb in Pakistan’s Marriott Hotel. The world should take notice because it is in the international community’s best interest to pay attention since there are victims from Europe, North America, Africa and the Middle East. The bombings were carried out to protest the United States’ presence in Pakistan, which has been steadily increasing over the past couple of months.
Since it is a world affair, it is only natural for every major news outlet in every country to take notice, but the angle that media establishment decides to publish changes from country to country. Taiwan decided to give a human feel with their story by using witness accounts of being blown to the back of a room and helping colleagues with a head injury out of the rubble. It then decided to notify its readers of the recent deaths occurring from bombings in Islamabad. It furthered the emotional impact with statements from the President empathizing with the victims because he also lost a loved one in a terrorist attack.
The angle that the American media chose too take was vastly different. The American media chose to downplay the emotional aspect focusing primarily on terrorism. This was more expected because the world knows that the United States has had a vested interest in fighting terrorism. Also, the war on terrorism is highly unpopular, so it would have been best for the media to leave out jarring physical accounts of people and focus primarily on the strategic side of the story.
 Asif Shazad, “Truck bomb destroys Pakistan Marriott, kills 40,” Taiwan News, 21 September 2008. http://www.etaiwannews.com/etn/news_content.php?id=744143 .
 Nahal Toosi, “Change in plans reportedly saved Pakistani leaders,” Fox News, 22 September 2008. http://foxnews.com/wires/2008Sep22/0,4670,ASPakistan,00.html .