Dramatizations and Political Conflicts in the New York Times

White House seeks to Allay Muslim Fears on Terror Hearings

New York Representative (R) and Homeland Security Committee chairman John King is planning to hold hearings on the issue of domestic Islamic radicalism. The New York Times' article discusses President Obama's actions to calm apprehensions among Muslims and adds in a bit of drama as well. While quotes and reactions from members of the Muslim community are dispersed throughout the story, the main point is centered on partisan disputes and religious drama. Part of the article highlighted the mistaken assumptions around Obama's religious identity, as well as the point that "Republicans have accused the Obama administration of ignoring the Islamic nature of terrorism by preferring terms like 'violent extremism'." Interestingly, one of Obama's advisers was tasked with dispelling fears about the hearings, yet the article couldn't refrain from discussing this particular controversy. In one statement that yields both partisan and religious dramatization, the NYT article points out King's debate with Democratic and Muslim Representative Keith Elliot.

At one point, the story notes that "Because Mr. King has not been specific about his plans, rumors are swirling." It seems the NY Times is contributing to the confusion by adding its own dramatized perspective to the mix. Though it is not the most blatant, the opening statement of the article already politicizes the issue by introducing King as "a Republican congressman" while describing the advisor's speech to a largely Muslim audience as a 'reaction' to the former's plans. More attention was generally given to the political players than the Muslim community itself. The title is quite different from actual article content; the political and cultural dramatizations are generally subtle yet pervasive.