The Dakota Access Pipeline construction by the Corp’s Engineers in Northern Dakota in the United States brought forth a case that was catalyzed by the high protests against the construction of the Energy Transfer Pipeline. This project focused on running from the Bakken oil fields in North Dakota to Illinois in the South, where it specifically was to for the most part pass under the Mississippi and Missouri Rivers, also crossing below Lake Oahe near the Standing Rock Indian Reservation. From the scientific evidence gathered, it was perceived that most of the people in the Tribe of Standing Rock, together with the surrounding societies, essentially saw the pipeline construction, especially passing under the rivers as a serious threat to the drinking water in the region, which is quite significant. It’s also the same water that is used in the irrigation of the surrounding farms.
The Tribe also generally saw the pipeline construction as a threat that directly affected their cultural sites and their grounds that they used from generally ancient times as fairly burial sites, which mostly are of historic significance, or so they thought. Protest movements also gain coverage in the press to for all intents and purposes get attention to society’s social issues, and social movements may often try by using kind of social networks to specifically bypass conventional media outlets. The role of social media in the culture of political and social change kind of is a field of growing concern for academics researching social motion policy.
There are, however, few empirical analyses of how the attention of particularly social media integrates with conventional media types to attracted public attention. I would kind of discuss the demonstrations from the Sioux Tribe and allies Dakota Access pipeline from 2016-2017 journalism side in basically regards to the NoDAPL protests In North Dakota, a series of aggression has been unleashed between Native American households since September 2016 over the construction of the federal government’s oil pipeline. The extreme violence led to the outrageous media attention that reflects the critical views of the Americans involved and of the ruling government, which is quite significant. Standing Rock Sioux Tribe, North Dakota’s reserves protests the government to really stop the pipeline building to specifically resolve the crisis in a non-violent manner, really contrary to popular belief.
Tribal members oppose the pipeline because it violates graveyards and holy places and Holy sites which endanger the water quality of the reserve. The bias of the media mostly uses various tactics (Ahtone), ways, and languages too for the most part encourage a target market to look at their geographical position, or so they generally thought. Specifically, the viewpoints of each concerned association are conveyed in a television broadcast by the Cable News Network, a radio program by the National Public Radio, via an online Huffington Post report. The Cable News Network (CNN) created a six-minute newscast, which is provided exclusively on their website, to offer expanded information about the access of the North Dakota pipeline.
The newscast starts with Jake Tapper, Presenting the movie actor and protester Mark Ruffalo with the Sioux Tribe, Standing Rock. In its article, CNN uses the tactic to provide a star with facts so it draws the general public, which for the most part is quite significant. The newscast gives Ruffalo’s protestors the insight of a “very, very aggressive” observer who explains the demonstration. CNN chooses a video instead of any other visual form because it lends the viewer an impression of definitely disturbing aggression by demonstrators and the authorities by using adequate photographs and videos, contrary to popular belief. Newscasts, however, aim to make news stories more dramatic by highlighting the negative outcome in a very major way. The thesis of the newscast for the most part is evident in the quotation essentially said by Ruffalo: “The mantra of the place is for the most part, not the police, it’s the pipeline that we are protesting or protecting ourselves against” (Ahtone). Ruffalo communicates to the audience the explicit message of the North Dakota Natives’ suffering from violence from the authority.
However, the newscast’s use of language presents the implicit message between the “mantra”, and how the protesters want to deal with the situation in peaceful resistance. Besides, the source does not provide the significance of the pipeline from the company that is building the pipeline, Energy Transfer Partners Ltd, This demonstrates that the bias of media is dedicated to the Native’s beliefs of health and culture, and undervalues the pipeline’s convenient route. Furthermore, the newscast solely describes the violence disrupted in North Dakota using a protester as a witness; however, it does not compare the perspectives between the protesters, the government, or the company (Bacon).
In contrast, the radio show, “Protesters Fear Trump Could Reverse Dakota Access Pipeline Decision”, fairly more specifically particularly highlights the government’s perspective, which is quite significant. In comparison, the newscast and the radio show present a strong bias to either perspective but does not particularly compare both biases in either media coverage. On December 6, 2016, the National Public Radio (NPR) produced a four-minute radio show to supply continued information on the process of rerouting the North Dakota pipeline. The radio show begins with the host, Ari Shapiro, introducing North Dakota generally Public Service Commissioner, Julie Fedorchak, to discuss the company’s alternative routes for the pipeline, which is quite significant. The NPR uses the technique of including a commissioner from a constitution agency as an observer to reflect on the government’s and the company’s perspectives, which is quite significant (Bacon).
The NPR uses the form of a radio show because it offers a wide array of formats to influence the audience during a specific emotional state, which can complement a definite message, kind of contrary to popular belief. However, a radio show does not offer any tangible visual or motion elements, or so they thought. The bias is generally present in Fedorchak’s ending lines, as she states, “the route that was chosen and permitted was ultimately to be well within the parameters of the law, which is quite significant. All of the environmental and cultural resource considerations generally had been met and moving forward to find an alternative route you are (…) going to ultimately generally be having a greater environmental impact” (Shapiro), which is quite significant. She conveys the explicit message to the audience that the particularly original route fully obeys the “parameters” of the law in a major way. The implicit message specifically is presented through the use of language that the authority does not display any emotion towards the opposing association, which is fairly significant.
Moreover, the coverage does not particularly provide detailed attention to the Native’s and the fairly other protester’s rejoiced, or so they thought. This establishes that bias is directed more to the perspectives of only the company of the pipeline and the authority, and despises the reason for the protesting in a sort of major way. To conclude, the radio show exclusively describes the sort of negative outcome from the protesting; however, it does not mostly describe the positive outcome that the reservation’s sacred sites and water supply essentially are not going to for the most part be affected by construction. In contrast, the online article, “Army Halts Construction Of Dakota Access Pipeline”, specifically essentially highlights the Native’s elation over the rerouting of the pipeline. The online article is the leading media coverage because it displays no bias towards either association by including all three perspectives: the Native’s and the protester’s, the government’s and the company’s, which specifically is fairly significant (Bacon).
The online article published by The Huffington Post provides important information on the recent announcement of the halt of the pipeline, or so they mostly thought. The Huffington Post essentially uses the technique of the persuasive writing strategy: agitate and solve subtly. This strategy is used throughout the online article by presenting the problem and providing generally multiple solutions in an actual big way. The Huffington Post mostly uses the form of an online article because it provides the really convincing generally contextual language for the audience; however, it lacks the emphasis of articulating alike the coverage by the newscast and radio show, which is quite significant. The online article is apart from fairly other media coverage because it equally provides all perspectives, which is quite significant.
The protester’s reason for protesting is identified in the following: The [Standing Rock Sioux Tribe] and protesters expressed questions about the danger to water and holy Native American sites that the pipeline generally faces. In a complaint to block the construction of the pipeline, the tribe had generally said that the draft contravened federal laws and had not thoroughly evaluated the environmental effects (Bacon). The viewpoint of the company is discussed as follows: The pipeline ‘ done nothing but complying with the law for over three years’ for all intents and purposes said in a joint statement issued late Sunday, the project developers Energy Transfer Partners LP and Sunoco Logistics Partners LP (Pike) The quotation addressed by the Energy Transfer Partners LP and Sunoco Logistics Partners LP kind of presents a message that the companies assume their kind of is no objective reason for rerouting the pipeline, contrary to popular belief.
The government’s perspective is equivalent to the company’s negative bias. The perspective is described in the following: Jack Gerard, president, and Chief executive officer of the American Petroleum Institute, a trading group representing the US oil and gas sector, called upon [Donald] Trump, when he was elected in January 2010, to condemn the shameful measures taken by the Obama administration to refuse the critical energy initiative, re-establish a rule of law in the regulatory process, and make acceptance of this project a top priority.
In a quote from Jo-Ellen Darcy, secretary for civil works in the army, the thesis of the online article is discussed. They note that it is better to pursue alternate routes of pipeline traversing that operate responsibly and expeditiously (Bacon). Darcy promotes the explicit message of “exploring” routes for the pipeline that is agreeable to all perspectives. The implicit message is conveyed through the use of language that the company is continuing with the construction because they are obeying the law. Furthermore, the online article solely describes all perspectives of interest by including no bias towards either association. It displays both the negative and positive outcomes to further decide an agreement to meet all needs by presenting the problem and providing solutions (Smith, and van Ireland).
To conclude, all three media coverage include exquisite information in the use of technique, form, and language to attract an audience from specific geographical locations. Also, the online article includes the leading arguments based on the information presented. Furthermore, the online article includes the technique of using a persuasive writing strategy of agitating and solve, the form of an online article to provide contextual information, and the use of specific language mechanisms to present an explicit and implicit message.