This newspaper critique will be
looking at two articles that cover the recent updates on the missing Malaysia
Airlines airplane, commonly known as Flight MH370. The first is titled,
“Malaysia’s Statements on Flight 370 and Plane Debris Rekindle Relatives’ Grief
and Anger”, from the New York Times (Forsynthe, 2015), and the second, “
Differing messages on 777 part frustrate Flight 370 families”, from The
Huffington Post (Ng, 2015).
These newspaper articles are written
in relation to Flight MH370, which disappeared en route from Kuala Lumpur to
Beijing on March 8, 2014. The New York Times largely covers the reactions of
families whose relatives were on the flight, towards the discovery of part of a
wing, known as a flaperon, which washed up on a remote island in the Indian
Ocean. The flaperon has generated a large amount of interest due to the high
possibility that it is part of the missing plane. The article includes comments
from family members, expressing their frustration at contradictory statements
made by official parties regarding the flaperon. It also touches on the actions
of the Malaysian authorities since the flight went missing and the current
affairs of the Malaysian Prime Minister, Najib Razak.
Meanwhile, the Huffington Post also
showcases the emotions and sentiments of the families, while providing some
background to the discovery of the flaperon. The article shows how the mixed
messages from Malaysian and French officials in particular, regarding identification
of the flaperon, are most distressing to the families. It also mentions
conspiracy theories in passing towards the end.
With regards to the New York Times
article, the focus is mostly on two things: the way in which the manhandling of
MH370 and its related events have affected the families involved, and the
suspicion towards Malaysian officials and their tarnished reputations. Direct
quotes from three family members, all Chinese, are included in the article;
there are also mentions of their demonstrations at the Malaysia Airlines and
Boeing offices in Beijing, China. Several paragraphs have been devoted to
discussing the newly discovered flaperon; it notes that Prime Minister Najib
made his announcement confirming the origin of the flaperon as part of MH370
before the manufacturer of the plane did so. It also makes note of Najib’s
involvement in the current Malaysian scandal regarding an enormous amount of
money allegedly transferred into the Prime Minister’s personal accounts before
the previous general election, as well as the rather misguided efforts by
Malaysian authorities to find MH370 in the immediate aftermath of the missing
jet.
The article from the Huffington Post
takes a slightly different, although not entirely opposed approach; it focuses
on the disparity between statements made by Malaysian, French, Australian and
American authorities regarding the flaperon found on Reunion Island. From the
Malaysian side, Najib confirms that it is indeed from the missing plane, as
does the Transportation Minister, Liow Tiong Lai. However, the Australian
government, currently in charge of the seabed search for the plane, only admits
to a high probability of the flaperon’s origins, and even suggests there is
good reason to doubt the Malaysian statements. As for the French, officials
have debunked Liow’s claims regarding new debris besides the flaperon, and are
only affirming their dedication to analysing the flaperon for concrete proof.
It is interesting that the New York
Times article contains such emphasis on the grief of the Chinese families, a
move that feels like an attempt to gain readers’ empathy. At times it feels
like an effort to contain the focus on MH370, seeing as the plane disappeared
more than a year ago. Perhaps the article hopes to gain undivided attention of
its readers, some of whom may be desensitized to any news of the missing plane,
considering the amount of coverage it has received since that eventful March
day last year. The article also hints at the kinks in the leadership of Najib
Razak, with sly nods to his alleged involvement in embezzling money, perhaps
offering the suggestion that the search for the missing plane and now, the
investigation of the flaperon, would be better conducted under a different
person.
The Huffington Post, meanwhile,
discusses the contradictory statements made by authorities from all sides
regarding the flaperon. It is a clear directive to readers that the facts are
never quite facts, and the truth is a matter of circumstances and who delivers
it. The Malaysian authorities are perceived as rather hasty in their remarks,
possibly in a desperate attempt to gain closure and some semblance of dignity
in the debacle that has been and is MH370. This is especially clear when posed
against the cautious statements of French investigators. It seems there is no
clear consensus on the matter, which only serves to deepen the sorrow and
confusion of the families involved.
In conclusion, there are many
similarities between the two articles from the New York Times and the
Huffington Post, albeit with a slightly different focus. Both articles are
well-researched and contain enough details to clue in an uninformed reader,
while posing new information to the seasoned follower of the missing flight
MH370. One article showcases the real, uncontrolled side of a grief that has
yet to find closure, while the other poses the facts of a case and leaves it
open for interpretation. I cannot say one has an edge over the other – rather
it is a choice on the reader’s part, to take in what he/she will, and decipher
of it what she/he will.
Reference
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-wires/20150806/missing-malaysian-plane/?utm_hp_ref=world&ir=world
No comments:
Post a Comment