Week 11: It's Abbott's turn to visit Afghanistan

5 articles: SMH, news.com.au, The Daily Telegraph, The Australian & ABC

http://www.smh.com.au/national/abbott-thanks-aussie-troops-in-afghanistan-visit-20101010-16dj2.html

http://www.news.com.au/national/tony-abbott-visits-troops-in-afghanistan/story-e6frfkvr-1225936672180

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/sunday-telegraph/abbotts-afghanistan-visit-welcomed/story-e6frewt0-1225936702671

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/defence/tony-abbott-visits-troops-in-afghanistan/story-e6frg8yo-1225936621042

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/10/10/3034090.htm

I blogged on Gillard’s visit to the “war-torn” nation last week, but not to be outdone, this week Tony Abbott visited Afghanistan.

His visit was covered widely across the media, with much emphasis placed on his rejection of a joint visit with Gillard last week.

But to that in a moment.

SMH covered the trip, as did news.com.au and The Daily Telegraph. However, a cursory glance of their articles revealed the same AAP article word-for-word. Not this again! (See Week 8 blog entry.)

Multimedia was similar across the three – a couple of photos, some related coverage, a comments section for news.com.au and the Telegraph (55 comments on the news.com.au story compared with 0 for the Telegraph suggest it was more popular). SMH has a photo of a jubilant officer shaking Abbott’s hand, but all I could think was: “where was Abbott’s flak jacket?!”

All articles refer to Abbott’s “widely criticised” dismissal of a visit with Gillard due to preemptive concern over jetlag (!). Immigration Minister Chris Bowen’s comment that Abbott had wanted to be embedded with troops, like journalists often are, made me think: “step off our turf, Tony!”

The Australian also reported on the visit, their article compiled by “staff writers”, “with AAP”. Hmmm… BUT! Although their article is clearly drawn from the same source, extra paragraphs demonstrate further research. They reveal Gillard’s reaction to Abbott’s refusal: “Ms Gillard took political advantage by saying she had managed to visit Afghanistan… without ill-effect”. And Abbott’s rebuttal: “Abbott accused the Prime Minister of playing politics about his travel movements, in a cheap attempt to raise doubt about his commitment to Australia's participation in the conflict”.

A short video with snippets of his trip gives us a sense of the visit but the audio is a bit jumpy.

ABC’s – original - story was shorter but contained most essential information. I liked the included video – a short clip from ABC’s Insiders. Host Barrie Cassidy and a few others discussed the trip and mentioned declining public support for the war, plus the upcoming parliamentary debate on the war for November.

My vote goes to both The Australian and ABC this week.

Week 10: "GI Julia" visits troops

2 articles: The Herald Sun & The Daily Telegraph

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/national/prime-minister-julia-gillard-visits-afghanistan/story-e6frf7l6-1225933363986

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/gi-julia-gillard-surprises-afghan-front-line/story-e6freuy9-1225933509982

The Herald Sun features a picture of Gillard as we’ve never seen her before – in army helmet and flak jacket - during her “whirlwind”, “gruelling”, “high-profile” “surprise” trip to the “war-torn” nation to visit “embattled” Afghan President Karzai and Aussie troops.

The adjective-rich Herald Sun story by Mark Kenny about Gillard’s visit to Afghanistan emphasises that public sentiment is turning against Australian involvement in the war. We are told Gillard assured forces that their role is in the “national interest” and that it’s been “a really hard year, a really hard few months”. This quote provides an opening which the Herald Sun disappointingly doesn’t utilise – no figures on Australian troop numbers, or recent troop casualties, are provided. (It’s a shame the article did not divulge this important and highly relevant information, but considering the article highlighted increasing public disapproval with Australia’s involvement, maybe skipping this information was deliberate?)

However a link to a short Sky News video filled in some gaps, revealing that the roughly 1,500 Australian troops in Afghanistan are to be withdrawn within four years. Links to other articles on the war are provided.

Kenny is also writer for The Daily Telegraph’s significantly shorter story. It contains very similar, but more compact and succinct, content. Extra details are disclosed – the 21 Australian troop casualties, and that Gillard’s trip was kept secret for “security reasons”.

I’d describe the accompanying multimedia as voluminous: the “multimedia showcase” is extensive - even disproportionate - for such a tiny article. So while last week I lamented a shortfall in multimedia (SMH article), this week I’m bemoaning the excessive multimedia in the Telegraph. But I believe that for multimedia to be effective, it should always be well-placed and appropriate.

17 comments under the Telegraph’s article indicates less hits than the 69 for the Herald - could this be because readers were too overwhelmed by all the multimedia to comment (or even read the article)?!

Week 7: The Devil Calls

2 articles: SBS and The Daily Telegraph - 30/08/10

http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/1339902/Heffernan-says-he-s-the-caller

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/election/liberal-devil-came-calling-apologises-to-rob-oakeshott-for-devil-prank-on-pregnant-wife/story-fn5zm695-1225911582418

SBS’s article, “Heffernan says he’s the caller”, leads on naturally from their earlier story “Oakeshott receives ‘devil’ call”. A call was made to Independent MP Rob Oakeshott’s phone, with the caller identifying himself as “the devil”. The story reveals that the mystery caller was Liberal Senator Bill Heffernan.

The gravity of the incident is further outlined with the mention of Oakeshott’s role as one of the independents holding sway over which party will form government. We are told that Oakeshott believes there is a smear campaign against him, and that Tony Abbott has reassured him that the Liberals aren’t being underhanded.

Oakeshott’s quotes emphasise how high the stakes are, especially when he suggests the Liberals are destabilising the situation to “send everyone back to the polls, to spend $50 million of taxpayers’ money." The SBS article reveals further tensions when Liberal senator Mitch Fifield deflects the attention back to Labor, claiming they are in “disarray”. The article is informative and plays to an adversarial angle, which is very effective in the context of the political stalemate.

The Daily Telegraph article places more emphasis on the specifics of the phone call. The headline: “Liberal devil came calling, apologises to Rob Oakeshott for devil prank on pregnant wife” is intriguing, and likely to grab readers’ attention.

The story also gives background on Senator Heffernan, and, similar to the SBS story, highlights political tensions. However, The Daily Telegraph article further underscores the turbulent state of politics when it informs us that another independent, Tony Windsor, also received a threatening call from a Liberal MP.

Both articles broach the subject well but The Daily Telegraph’s adversarial approach is more comprehensive, translating to more impact. Along with its use of a photo slideshow, links to related coverage and a comments section – as opposed to the complete absence of multimedia in the SBS article - The Daily Telegraph delivers a more comprehensive online reader experience.

**Please note: shortly after submitting this blog, the SBS article changed online to: "The devil and Rambo join negotiations". The new article is significantly different to the one I analysed (Heffernan says he's the caller"), but I did save the text from the original article in a Word document.