Sky Cowans

September 17, 2013

COM 234
Comparative Analysis of the agenda setting of political coverage
The news media has the ability to influence what is on the publics minds. By choosing
what content to feature on their programming, television news can bring certain issues to the
forefront of public opinion. Cable news channels that are independent of public broadcasting
have an even greater impact on agenda setting, especially in politics. Through a comparative
analysis of two cable news channels, agenda setting can be inspected through an examination of
minutes spent on certain stories, image and video footage, featured sound bytes, and live
interviews. These choices all play a major role in the agenda setting of the news. The political
agenda setting of CNN and Fox News is subtle, yet noticeable when looked at through a critical
lens.
CNN, owned by the Turner Broadcasting System of Time Warner, was founded in 1980
by Ted Turner. It was the first cable news network to provide 24-hour news coverage. In its early
days, CNN was nicknamed the Chicken Noodle Network because of its scarce financial
resources. CNN worked hard to gain respect from the broadcast world and eventually gathered a
loyal following by offering a continuous report of news, while major networks only offered news
during certain day parts. CNN is known for its widespread international coverage and its large
team of foreign correspondents abroad.
Fox News was founded in 1996 by Rupert Murdoch and was created as an alternative to
CNN and MSNBC. In 2002, Fox News beat out CNN as the number one cable news channel.
Since then, it has maintained its spot as number one despite being accused of having a
conservative agenda. At its launch, Fox News was only available to ten million homes, not

including the major markets of New York and Los Angeles. Four years later, Fox News
experienced a 440% increase in viewership during the 2000 presidential election.
CNNs hour long show, Fareed Zakaria GPS, airing on Sunday September 15th at 1 p.m.,
focused mainly on the conflict in Syria. This was discussed at the top of the hour, which
automatically gives it greater importance than anything else in the rest of the show. First, Zakaria
interviewed former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger and President Jimmy Carters national
security adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski about whether or not the U.S. should be trusting Russia in
addressing the chemical weapons in Syria. Kissinger, a Republican and Brzezinski a Democrat,
CNNs choice of opinions on the issue, demonstrates objectivity, which is how the delivery of
news should operate. The segment was not politically biased as the audience was offered the
point of view of specialists from different political parties. Both Kissinger and Brzezinski agreed
that the U.S. and Russia share a common interest in avoiding military action in Syria.
After spending a solid eight minutes on these interviews, discussion of Syria continued
with an interview with former Chairman of UNSCOM Richard Butler, about using lessons from
the Iraq War on how to destroy Syrias chemical weapons. This was also not politically biased,
as the goal of the conversation was to examine ways to solve the chemical weapons issue in
Syria by speaking with an expert who dealt with a similar situation in the past. This lasted about
seven minutes, giving Syria the entire first 15-20 minutes of the show. This is valid because the
story is newsworthy, especially on a show such as GPS, which is centered on foreign affairs.
While the discussion of Syria remained unbiased, a later segment on GPS seemed to have
a more liberal feel. At approximately 1:45 p.m., Zakaria sat down with Aasif Mandiv and Ayad
Akhtar, two actors in the play Disgraced, who portray Muslim-Americans dealing with living
in the everyday remembrance of 9/11. The two actors told Zakaria that the play examines how

the western world looks at Islam through a horribly narrow lens after 9/11, as well as the
difficulty Muslim-Americans endure as a result of being stereotyped as terrorists. Focusing on
the problems involved with the wests view of the Middle East and Muslims in general, offered a
more liberal feel in that as citizens, this is something we need to be more aware of and address.
This seven-minute segment included footage from the actual play, which encouraged viewers to
go see it and open their narrow minds.
An entirely different type of program than GPS, Fox News Americas News HQ was
more of a traditional news coverage with anchors delivering straight stories. On September 14th
at 3 p.m. the rundown included a large portion from the Colorado flooding, which was
powerfully enhanced by shocking video and still images as well as some emotional sound bytes.
While coverage of this natural disaster remained objective, there was a slight Republican
subjectivity on several of their later stories. The top of the hour featured a story about labor
leaders addressing concerns with President Obamas Healthcare law. Included was video of
protestors as well as a sound byte from an official who generally supports Obama, but said he
was unhappy with the law. By showing that even Democratic supporters are complaining, Fox
News is creating a mindset for their audience that Obamacare is bad.
They even returned to the issue at the bottom of the hour in a crosstalk with specialist
Mickey Cargile, which centered on the financial problems with Medicare. A major part of this
story was that the AFL-CIO, one of Obamacares biggest investors, publicly spoke out against
the law, stating that they are unhappy and want it changed. Again, showing opposition from
Democrats offers a Republican bias and sets the agenda for the audience for how they should feel
similarly as citizens.

The middle of the hour included a story with a lower third that headlined: several
elections across the globe show possible shift against liberal policies. This focused on gun
control specifically and included a crosstalk interview with specialist John Ford. Both the news
anchors and Ford seemed to lean towards protecting gun rights rather than enforcing gun control,
with the argument that such laws would not be effective. This story is hardly newsworthy as the
survey only showed possible shifts. However, by giving the story and the crosstalk a solid six
minutes in the show, it was given importance and set the agenda for the audience to think about
gun control rights and possibly agree with the discussion between Ford and the anchors.
CNNs Fareed Zakaria GPS and Fox News Americas News HQ leave entirely different
impressions for their audience. While CNN leaned slightly liberal, it was far more objective than
Fox News, where several stories seemed to have a conservative agenda. This can be seen mainly
with the specialists that were brought in for crosstalk and interviews. GPS offered a more
perceptual approach to international headlines and deeper cultural issues, such as the MuslimAmerican struggle. They also brought in both a Democratic and Republican specialist to discuss
Syria. Disparately, Fox News brought in a Republican specialist alone to talk about gun control.
Viewers that selectively expose themselves to only one of these channels are likely going
to continue agreeing with the liberal or conservative opinions that are hidden in the
programming, without ever seeing the other side of the story. While the delivery of the news
aims to be objective, and most of the time is, that is not always the case. This selective exposure
is problematic because the political differences in our society remain stubborn and rigid. The
government never seems to accomplish anything because Republicans and Democrats never can
compromise agreements on certain issues. If public audiences continue to selectively expose
themselves, a similar effect occurs with this narrow-mindedness in our society.