To put it bluntly, Politico.com seems to be a conservative website focused on covering as much news as possible regarding politics and everything that falls underneath that category. This can include any political races, and scandals within the government, or even just wrap ups of the latest speech. The site seems to like to ask the reader their opinion on the situation, but skews the perception to the right. Some examples of some titles include 'Chris Christie wise not to run?', 'Whispers on Hill: Romney or Perry?', and 'Did Obama try to save Troy Davis?'. Though they set it up for the reader to make up their own mind, there is a subtle vibe of conservatism within the articles.
Again, the conservative point of view can be found in various places across Politico.com as they reference Fox News frequently. Most of the articles that are found within the sites boundaries involve a mistake or a misconception of a Democratic candidate or position holder. The site may claim to not have an opinion, but using phrases such as 'Obama bristles' or 'Obama's testy BET interview' point towards negative connotations of the Democratic party and Obama in general.
Videos are all over the site along with pictures where videos are not. There is an entire section dedicated to political videos, which is considered the new way of receiving technology. Watching videos for the readers is a way for them to receive information from the politicians themselves. Some examples of these videos are found here http://www.politico.com/multimedia/.
In general, the site is a good source of information, but reader beware, the information is opinionated and questionably reliable. Take caution before believeing everything that the site releases.
Adam,
ReplyDeleteI admire both your analysis of Politico and your writing tone here.
It's interesting to me that quite a few members of our class went looking for a political bias in Politico as part of their analysis. About half came away sure that it's a conservative media, the other half sure it's progressive. You are in the former camp, and you argue your points well and illustrate them with good examples - especially the lingo.
You do toss in a point at the end that you didn't really vet in your analysis: Politico is "questionably reliable." You'd need to back that up with clear reasoning and examples to make it more than a candy walk-off line.
Your writing tone here fits the subject matter well. It's direct, hard-edged and a little angry, but that works well for a blog.
Overall, a good job dissecting a niche media.