With stories it’s not so much what they are about/ but how they are told that defines them. Here are two tweets from the Associated Press and CNN about the same story:
AP: “Barrage of Gaza rockets draws Israeli air strikes; 1 Palestinian militant killed.”
cnnbrk: “Israeli airstrikes into Gaza have killed 3 Palestinians, after rocket attacks from Gaza into Israel.”
Same story, but two very different ways of telling it. It’s all about presentation. The CNN tweet makes it seem as though Israel blindly lashed out at the Palestinian community in an act of vengeance. The AP tweet, on the other hand, identifies only one person being killed, apparently omitting the existence of the other two, and identifies the fallen as a “militant,” or in other words a potential combatant. Between the two tweets, it can be determined: the Israeli air strikes were in response to rocket attacks from Gaza, three people were killed, and only one seems to have been a combatant. Goes to show, the way a story is told can be just as crucial as the facts themselves.