War & Violence
By John Dvorak

Weblog: I am covering the general patterns in violence that have been occurring during these two weeks. The first couple of days are questions because the Northern Alliance made a quick push south recently. The story progresses as one of escalation.

Nov. 13 - NY Times.com vs. Boston Globe

The Times' article was about the shifting of rule in Afghanistan as the Taliban leave Kabul. I think this is excellently written by John Burns, it doesn't need much else to substantiate itself, and the site doesn't really give it anything. The Boston Globe article is actually an editorial. Why are they plastered in the back pages. They are well written, more interesting, and can offer people perspective on what other people are thinking about important issues. I think the web medium features editorials still a lot more proudly.

Nov. 14 - USA Today vs. Salon.com

Just one day after the Times talked of past violence and questioning what will happen this time, journalists reported of massacres of Taliban prisoners. Maybe it USA Today's content, but this story was more prominent in most other publications. USA Today is similar to a lot of websites because it is flashy and the articles are quick and almost entertaining. Lots of pictures and images and graphs and different things to look at. Salon.com is one that slightly shifts from that mold in that its stories aren't much of an informational resource. This article questions what will happen in the next phase against terrorism. Everyone wants to know where Osama is, so why not ponder and guess what anybody can - anywhere.

Nov. 15 - NY Times vs. CNN.com

The print version of the Times today put three photographs together dominating above the fold of Afghans in recently changed hands Kabul. But none of the stories flanking them are about Kabul but in the hunt for Bin Laden. Government officials say we have 100 commandos tracking down Osama. It's really just an update in a continuing story. CNN.com has run similar stories about the caves in Afghanistan, and they have the best little diagram that you can go to from related stories that shows how some are designed to withstand bombing and booby traps and the like. Very intriguing after reading that US troops will have to go down there.

Nov. 16 - Village Voice vs. DrudgeReport

The Voice of course has an inherent tone, cynical of the government's handling of events. The author thinks the government is spending too much, while committing themselves to keeping order in Afghanistan for years to come. He is concerned with the refugees, and is helped by a picture of some poor little refugee youths. I don't like reading this without any back up. The writer isn't even there. I find the Drudge report a good spot to get AP stories. For each day the main ones have headlines, and you can search for the obscure.

Nov. 18 - Newsday vs. Santa Barbara News Press Online

This is the kind of reporting that an independent internet company probably couldn't pull off. The reporter's are right up in there, risking their lives, and probably getting paid pretty well or just crazy. The story includes a few photographs, including one that the writer even mentioned in the story being taken because the reporting team was so shocked to actually be seeing what was going on that they couldn't believe they were getting it on film. This was an interesting post from my home town page. It was an editorial from a local resident who was skeptic of any outcome from this war. It was interesting because the page they used was different from the other content pages. It was just grey background. Maybe the advertisers didn't want to be linked to that. But it seemed separated from the other stuff because of the presentation.

Nov. 19 - Salon.com vs. Washington Square News

Well, Salon.com can afford stories from reporters over there - but they're not as good. We're now around Konduz, bombing the shit out of them, and he's talking about the refugees feeling north. Salon.com makes an effort to be pretty formal with some of their stuff, maybe because they take some off the wire. But the war features aren't as good. The WSN's article is a column by Joe Waddell discussing something about "violence or compassion?" It's a big bore actually, he doesn't say anything substantial, only some ranting about extremists on both ends, and the text's only outside help is a picture of the writer. Blah. He makes a good point at the beginning - who are these allies of ours who are not much better than the enemy - but leaves it and never comes back.

Nov. 20 - LA Times.com vs. New York Post

LATimes.com is very similar to their print edition, except that to the left of the stories, there is a very long bar linking to information on summer camps, jobs, horoscope, cross word, everything a paper could offer you can get to from wherever. The Post has a flashy news site. Once you click into a story it's just you and the content and advertising. But the home page includes video, pictures, a couple things to offer that they can't in print.

Nov. 21 - Newsday vs. Slate.com

The Newsday piece has a byline from Combined News Services, and is very formal update on the fate of the Taliban soldiers. It is a main story on page four, it's like an AP read. Slate.com has a politics writer, David Plotz, and he asking how we control the Northern Alliance now from killing innocents too. Slate.com is orientated for self-promotion more than reader enlightenment it seems to me. There were links to other topics in slate.com, but not to related stories or background information.

Nov. 22 - New York Times vs. alternet.org

A Nation Challenged is devoted to everything WTC related, including still giving memorials to each victim in the back of each edition. There are really good pictures everywhere, and two pictures stand alone here almost as their own story. The article just cites officials as escalating more troops, but the pictures show the chaos and prisons and killing. Alternet.org is a leftist online publication that posts articles about various topics. This one is about Hindus in Bangladesh being violently persecuted by Muslims. The story stands alone, formal and serious. It has an option to go to an online forum where alternet.org readers can debate the often times controversial slants presented.

Nov. 23 - New York Times vs. VillageVoice.com

The Times article in A Nation Challenged starts its headline with "Fierce Fighting Erupts…" I've started to notice the violence increase, but people can't really come up with clear numbers. It is becoming clear that neither side is very trustworthy. But again, the pictures are always in color on this page and are really gripping. They can be a lot bigger in print than online. VillageVoice.com is great for the publication because its stories have a broader reach. Because they like to talk it up in their features. Their illustrations are famous, but their stories are very informative and well researched. And the news does take the forefront in the publication.

Nov. 24 - The Toronto Star vs. CNN.com

CNN.com is my favorite news site online. The war in Afghanistan is probably what the average person going to the site is interested in. So they have a picture, and a lede, with bullets outlining other key developments. The story is much the same way, short paragraphs with facts and numbers and up to minute reports. They offer video, audio, and visual elements straight from the home page. I think they do an excellent job at prioritizing stories. The front page of the Toronto Star reported the Northern Alliance fighters vowed to kill any foreign Taliban prisoners. The article included other developments too, and was basically the general news article that every publication has for this war. Most big market papers don't experiment too drastically.

Nov. 25 - The Economist vs. LA Times.com

Nothing new from the Times, except that they gave a little bio on the writer before the story which I really liked. She had some authority in the field of how the United Nations gives help and it was nice to see that. Now her reasons for why Afghanistan is difficult for the UN to control are now a lot more valid. The Economist chose to run a story about the fighters off the front lines who are experiencing some kind of freedom for a while. They have a fighting terrorism section, and although its tone is hopeful, it reports a different story. New Warlords like that of Somalia are taking shape it seems.

Nov. 26 - Time.com vs. New York Times

This story in time is great. The magazine sites follow their parents just like print. The story says it is part photo essay, but there aren't any visible. In the middle of the story is a navigation bar linking to diagrams and images and related stories and up to date stories. This is why I would buy a print magazine, it's a lot quicker. Pictures can be bigger, and you can look at the text and images at the same time. It's a shame the pictures aren't there with the story. And today we get reports that an American may have been killed in a prison uprising. New York Times had a picture of a wounded man scrambling over a wall that was posted everywhere. But all signs continue to point towards a messy conflict. And today Bush has talked about more deaths, and this war isn't close to being over with.

Home | First Wave | Undertow | Reflections | Stepping Stones | Weblogs

Contributors | About Us | Archive