Originally Posted by GoodNamesGone
perspective - I won't argue that one report may slant while another does not. Or one might be more opinionated than the next. Not all journalists are good at the unbiased thing.
I didn't look- are both reports from the same person? That would DEFINATELY be biased then. I was just trying to point out that the matter-of-factly tone is one that a journalist is suppossed to have unless it is an "opinion piece" The journalism ethics are to present an unbiased report unless you clearly state that your report is of an opinion, or of your own opinion.
I am not trying to argue that main point either. My point is that the two issues are handled differently. Maybe its that FGM photos or news stories are generally presented in opinion pieces, or personal recounts, because its tried to be presented most of the time as human interest stories, framed as human rights issues that need to be corrected.
While male circumcision (especially in America) is presented in a very sanitised fashion. The tone is "this is why its good, this is why its bad, but we got no official opinion, and it does not matter" so its just "July 23-boy gets circumcised" The issue is simplified, and its complexity is often gutted out.