|
Afghanistan After The Taliban
By Yalda Jamal
Weblog: The story I am tracking is the fall of the Taliban
regime and the consequent changes in a now partially
liberated Afghanistan.
11/13/01
New York Times & USATODAY.com
Both sources cover the exact fleeing of the Taliban
from Kabul similarly, using about the same language.
The Times offered a page jump, and had it not been for
my natural interest in the topic I would not have further
read the article and thus turned the page. USATODAY.com,
however gave the lead of the story, as bait describing,
as in the Times the playing of music on the streets,
yet provided a link after the lead "read more below,"-I
immediately wanted to click to read the rest of the
article. I found the digital source more compelling.
11/14/01
New York Times & BBC.com
Today, the media focuses on what's next for Afghanistan
with the collapse of the Taliban. I find that the story
is much clearer and succinct on BBC.com than the New
York Times. The story online, besides being so cleanly
spaced out with block headers, offers the story in video.
There are also related links attached to the story in
an enjoyable manner. The story in the Times just seems
more complex and less reader friendly than on BBC.com.
Strangely, it even seems like BBC examines more angles
of the story mentioning "the threat of more chaos,"
and how the "Taliban grip weakens."
11/15/01
New York Times & MotherJones.com
The political future of Afghanistan. The rebuilding
of a broad-based government. The page the article was
displayed on, on the MotherJones.com web site had no
ads whatsoever. The page was eerily clean. I feel it
would have benefited more with photos or links to break
up the story. The related article in the Times, I observed
was on the op-ed page, which was interesting to read
yet the article itself did ask for a breathing moment.
11/16/01-11/17/01 -ill
11/18/01
New York Times &Slate.com
Slate offered many interactive choices associated with
its article on the Afghani people coming out of hiding
and onto somewhat "freer" streets. For example,
one could have a discussion on the future of Afghanistan
by entering the "Fray," or one could choose
to link to get further information. The Times, through
offering extensive and rare photos in its Sunday edition,
did manage to capture my attention. I did want to turn
the pages to get glimpses of different pictures the
same way I wanted to click through on Slate.com.
11/18/01
New York Times & Slate.com
(As a result of being ill and unable to read the news
on the 19th, I compensated by observing another related
article again on the 18th) I thought the New York Times
did an excellent job tracing the ranks and status, which
exists even among refugees within their camps. -Indirect
result of the Taliban. "How a Camp becomes a City,"
started out with a very cute lead and made for a very
interesting read. The piece also included several photos.
A related article in Slate.com manages to right an informing
story on refugees as well; however I found it extremely
difficult to follow as a "Qwest" advertisement
was literally moving across the page. Also, because
of these distracting ads, the use of block headers to
break up text just seemed irrelevant.
11/20/01
New York Times & WashingtonPost.com
Here there was not much difference in the two mediums
covering the increasingly interesting aspects of the
liberation of Kabul. Although the New York Times displayed
a huge photo of men chaotically entering a cinema while
WashingtonPost.com colorfully wrote about children flying
"once-banned kites." I also noticed that this
time the digital medium tastefully used ads, off to
the side, as they did not interfere or distract my eyes
from the article.
11/22/01
New York Post & Salon.com
· The story today doesn't seem as important
as previous days. What is highlighted instead for both
mediums is Thanksgiving. For the New York Post, a picture
of President Bush with troops having dinner dominates
the cover, while the collapsing Taliban are dealt with
later on the 4th page. On Salon.com, similarly the story
is one of the lower headings.
11/23/01
Daily News & Slate.com
· While tracking this story on Slate.com, referring
to the Taliban's loss of control in the city of Kunduz,
I found that the language used was in fact much more
conversational as opposed to the language used in the
Daily News. In referring to a specific town for example
slate said " just a half-hours- drive west of Kabul,"
while the Daily news stated "30 miles south of
Kabul."
· Strangely, for this story, more specifically
about the defecting Taliban in Kunduz, there are more
photos offered in the Daily News. The print source also
offers a map encompassing all of Afghanistan and explains
the importance of each province. The story in the digital
source doesn't display photos but is broken up by ads.
In this sense, the story seems more important told by
the print source.
11/24/01
New York Times & CNN.com
· The story remains on the subject of Kunduz
and the response of Afghanis to the groups of foreign
Taliban. The New York Times again had the story on the
front page, as it should be-with a photo of a convoy
of Taliban passing on a road. CNN.com similarly presented
the story, also using a photo of convoys passing. However,
in addition CNN used bullet points to highlight the
most important aspects of the story. The site also offered
a poll and video clips. The same story was definitely
more enjoyable to read on the Internet in comparison
to the paper.
11/26/01
New York Times & WashingtonPost.com
The capture of the last Taliban stronghold in Northern
Afghanistan. Between the two mediums, I noticed a change
in tone. While, the New York Times stressed that the
claim of capturing Kunduz by the Northern Alliance could
not yet be verified, WashingtonPost.com went ahead and
said "Northern Alliance troops today swept the
last Taliban defenders out of Kunduz." As far as
interactivity, WP did offer a list of long links to
the side related to the story. Unfortunately, the story
took an awful lot of scrolling time.
* In the end, I find that the digital medium is by
far more compelling to me. The print source besides
having restrictions, creates an unwanted stack of newspapers
in my apartment. The only downside to the digital source
would be the placement of ads, at times they can be
a little too distracting.
Home | First
Wave | Undertow | Reflections
| Stepping Stones
| Weblogs
Contributors
| About Us | Archive
|
