Language Analysis on the headlines of Mong Kok Event from different sources

To analyze the usage of words on the coverage of Mong Kok riot, I have found two reports from China Daily and BBC. The headline of Chinadaily is “Hong Kong overnight riot injures at least 48 police officers.” and the one of BBC is “Hong Kong clashes as police clear food stalls”

Here is the link of these two reports:

Chinadaily:

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2016-02/09/content_23438052.htm

BBC:

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-35529587

Now let’s begin with Chinadaily. The important content words I choose was “riot”, “injure” and “police officers”. I think that the word “police officers” should get a point of positive+5 because usually the police are the ones who help maintain order and prevent criminals. And here the coverage used “injure”, which should get a point of negative (-5) and active (+8), to indicates that the event happened is morally unacceptable. Plus, the word “riot” should worth a point of negative (-9) because usually we consider riot as a violent, unreasonable, and destructive event. As a result, because of the usage of the words, the public reading this article may be led to a negative view of this event. They are more likely to regard this event as an against-justice movement.

Second, the coverage of BBC news stood at a more neutral position. The content words I choose was “clashes” and “clear”. Obviously, the word “clashes” is less negative than “riot”, maybe I will give it a point of negative (-2). And the verb “clear” is milder and less active (+2), which makes the readers learn this event from a more objective angle.

Why there will be such differences between these two reports? I think it is mainly because the different positions of the newspaper office. BBC is a foreign media to Hong Kong. They do not have strong political and social tendency so their reports will be more neutral and objective. However, Chinadaily is under the“Central For-profit Cultural Institutions” in China, so it will stand at the same position as the government and regard the event as a “riot”. In conclusion, the subjective idea of the publisher will result in different usage of the coverage words and the different usage of words will lead the readers to totally different thinking. That is the power of language.。