Cut-and-Paste Dubai

The National this morning takes a look at what the British media has been writing about Dubai and headlines "Cut-and-paste critics give Dubai an unwarranted pasting". In many ways, this article is a good model for your media criticism essays. Note the point of view established at the start, backed up by examples. What's missing for me are the names of the publications whose coverage is being assessed.

It makes a different what publications are being considered and in what section the articles appeared. In only one instance, at the very end, does the writer cite specifics -- a travel story in The Sun, a gossipy, celebrity-driven tabloid. How has The Financial Times reported the Dubai story? The Guardian ? The Economist? What stories have run on front pages or in business sections?

I also wondered at first glance why the writer looked only at British media when the WWW gives access to the world, including a translation service for foreign-language press. But note who is writing this article. It is not a National staff writer but "an adviser to the London-based Arab Media Watch, whose mission is "Objective British Coverage of Arab Issues." That explains why only British coverage is assessed but not why he neglects to tell the reader what publications he is discussing.

I also want to know something about the person who is making the case. What are his credentials? Goggling the writer doesn't turn up much more than he is a journalist. Nothing on Facebook or LinkedIn.

All this goggling takes time, time none of us has. With all the information choices out there today -- in print, online, on the airwaves -- it's important to be a critical consumer of the news. One way is to decide what news sources you find credible. And even then read with a critical eye. Where do you go if you want to find reports you feel you can trust?