This report by Barbara Starr, a CNN Pentagon Correspondent is based on the attack that the United States made on one of the ISIS operating bases in Mosul, Iraq. In the report, the correspondent states that the building destroyed was purported to be the major area where the ISIS militants hid their money. Specifically, it was where they used to supply the monies that were used in their operations. Although the amount of money that was purportedly destroyed in not succinctly stated, it is estimated to be in millions (Barbara Starr, 2016). Further, the article states that the bombing was done at night when most of the civilians were not present in the building. Moreover, it is reported that the United States government plans to hit more targets for the ISIS militants in the near future (Correspondent, 2016). However, the difference between the news from the CNN network and the report made in the online source is evident. In this regard, the news from the network is first hand, short and concise. However, the information from the online source is more comprehensive. However, the two pieces of information are relevant and concrete in the manner in which they have been articulated by the respective reporters.
The intended audiences of the two reports are the US citizens and the whole world at large. Further, the report could also be important for the ISIS leaders and militants who will become aware of the bombing of their financial base. This report is meant to scare the militants to stop their activities as well as maim them such that they cannot operate in Iraq. Further, the world- on hearing this report; will indeed know the steps that the American government has taken to curb and indeed destroy the activities of the extremist groups.
The reasoning in the news report was absolutely solid. Further, the report was indeed credible. This is because; there was evidence in the form of pictures on how the building was destroyed. In the news for instance, a picture is shown of the building plus an outside car that was also hit. Further, the flow of the reports is very coherent. The reasoning is that; the US hit the building at night because there were few civilians at that time. Thus, hitting the building at night marginally reduced the number of civilian casualties.
The credibility of the report lies in the fact that it was reported by CNN, which is an internationally recognized news channel. Additionally, it was confirmed by US officials who are authorized to speak on behalf of the government.
The report undoubtedly had some bias. This is based on the fact that the amount of currency that is reported to have been destroyed is only estimated to be millions. However, there is no concrete evidence that any money was destroyed. Although it is clear and evident that the building was destroyed, there is no substantial proof that any cash was present and was indeed destroyed. Further, there was bias in the report on the number of casualties that were affected. Although, the report estimates them to be 50, this could not be the case. Therefore, the report is riddled with some bias.
Some of the information presented as fact and that which is debatable is the amount of cash that was destroyed. Even more, there is no substantial evidence that any money was destroyed in the Mosul building. Further, the contention that there were few civilians at night in the building is another fact that is subject to debate.
The questions in the report and the answers provided are very relevant. For instance, the question on how the US officials leant of the location is a relevant question. Additionally, the question as to the currency of the money supposedly destroyed by the bombing was relevant. This is to prevent people from being duped into believing in monies which never existed in the first place.
Sociocentric thinking was applied in the reporting in more ways than one. In this case, the reporters assumed that the money was used to pay the ISIS militants in their operations. Additionally, they link the current bombing to the one that was done on their oil trucks several weeks ago.
One of the differences in the two reports is that one was spoken and the other was written. Additionally, watching the news report is more fulfilling since one is able to watch the lips and read the mood of the correspondent. However, reading from the written article in the online source one can only imagine how the events occurred.
The different manner in which these two reports were made was affected by some outside pressures. Specifically, in the news reporting, there was pressure to report the news as quick as possible to the intended audience. Therefore, some of the information had not yet been confirmed. However, in the online source, the reporter had some time to assemble the news and confirm the facts.
Barbara Starr, C. (2016). First on CNN: US bombs 'millions' in ISIS currency stock - CNNPolitics.com. CNN. Retrieved 11 January 2016, from http://edition.cnn.com/2016/01/11/politics/us-bombs-millions-isis-currency-supply/index.html
Correspondent, B. (2016). U.S. bombs 'millions' in ISIS currency holdings. WCVB. Retrieved 11 January 2016, from http://www.wcvb.com/politics/us-bombs-millions-in-isis-currency-holdings/37376284
Cite this page
U.S. Bombs 'Millions' In ISIS Currency Holdings. (2021, Mar 03). Retrieved from https://proessays.net/essays/us-bombs-millions-in-isis-currency-holdings
If you are the original author of this essay and no longer wish to have it published on the ProEssays website, please click below to request its removal:
- Case Analysis Example: New York Times Co. v. United States
- Biography of Laura C Redden Searing. Paper Sample
- Annotated Bibliography Example on the Print Media Issues
- Women in War Essay Example
- Critical Reading of John Gatto's Article "Against School"
- American Military Evolution During Different Wars of 19-20 Centuries Paper Example
- Paper Example on Homeland Defense and Homeland Security intelligence