Fox News, CNN, ABC News, LA Times, and the LA Sentinel have many things in common, but their attitudes toward many topics and issues that arise are very different. After looking into many headlines of multiple media outlets, I was able to get a sense of how their coverage diverges. I noticed that the same news is covered by different media outlets who present the news in different ways. These differences motivated me to dive right into this research topic, and search ways this occurs when speaking of prisons in America and how it affects the community at large. I believe the media is there not to influence the public by telling their narrative of the stories, but to present the actual facts for the public’s knowledge. In this research paper, I hope to explore the perspectives and attitudes used between the Los Angeles Times and the Los Angeles Sentinel newspapers, particularly diving into the coverage surrounding the 1971 uprising at the San Quentin State Prison and how they are different and similar.
If we look particularly at the ways prisons are spoken of in the media you will notice that each newspaper will tell the situation differently. I specifically observed the difference between the Los Angeles Times and the Los Angeles Sentinel, and I found that both are regarded as highly credible and influential news sources that do great jobs at sharing their perspective along with the factual findings. They may execute this differently, but both of their objectives are to share the facts and provide the public with the information they need to make the necessary and best possible decisions about their lives, their communities, their societies, and their local, state, and national governments. Although I am focusing on the LA Times and the LA Sentinel news sources, we cannot forget that these differences I recognized are happening often in many of the top news outlets the public looks to for the truth and facts.
The Los Angeles Times does a great job of telling the public their own chronological narrative of the events they are covering. They also in my opinion like to use the capital it has to influence their readers. By doing this the Los Angeles Times used the comments and opinions of certain individuals to narrate a story of the prison uprising. These opinions the article brought up are factual but decrease the truthfulness of their narrative due to the questions that arise. They began many of the articles about the 1971 riots by introducing the public to those involved as big criminals who orchestrated an unsuccessful prison escape. This narrative that the Los Angeles Times shares and supports would seem as if it comes from the perspective of the police and sheriff departments. In many of the articles I have read, I noticed that most of the statements used in their article included officers, which gave the attorneys the ammunition to try the case. The way the LA Times told this story shows one of the many ways news influences the public, by just telling what happened. These articles and many after are showing me that the LA Times pushes the public to ask questions.
The Los Angeles Sentinel appeases more to the public’s emotions towards an event that they are covering. The LA Sentinel to me influenced the public by asking the question about the case that surrounded the most controversial topics in our society. They did that because they wanted to reach not only the people who are in their communities but everyone whose lives may be affected by what is going on. After looking into both of these newspapers, I noticed the rhetoric was completely different and the main source of influencing the public. The LA Sentinel used titles like “Tragedies and Brothers” while the LA Times used titles like “Convicted Killers Escape Plan” this was done to influence the public thoughts about what truly happened. In fact, both newspapers influenced the trial so much that questions were begun to be asked that ended with jurors walking out and leaving the courthouse entirely.
One LA Sentinel article stood out to me in my research because it assumed that what was told to the public at that moment was not the full truth and it demanded the entire truth. In this article, the author suggests that those who did the investigation into the uprising fabricated a story to meet their personal narrative that they want to share with the public. This is something that people say happens often within different news sources covering the same story, then the true authentic story gets miscued and that is what happened during this case. Another article had a section that speaks on the unanswered questions that everyone thought of but not asked out loud in court. This newspaper did a great job at not just telling the facts but not painting a horrible image of those involved in the trial. Their articles explained why each of the six men involved was in jail, unlike the LA Times which broadcasted their worst convictions. These sections that the LA Sentinel had put into their newspaper gave the community a voice. This voice did not just focus on what happened in San Quentin in 1971 but how these six men changed themselves or impacted the community with their story.
Whether they are newspapers or broadcasts, the media has always had the same objective; informing the public and getting them engaged. The many news sources out there accomplish this in multiple ways while also adding their own flair to each story that’s covered. I understand now that no matter how news outlets tell the story they will always influence a specific group in the public. In particular, these articles from the LA Times and LA Sentinel, influenced the mindset of the black community, the police and correctional departments, and those trying and judging the case itself. And although, these two newspapers delivered and promoted different versions they were able to get across the information needed. They informed the public on what was happening, and they got them asking questions, different types of questions, but true civic engagements.
