Russia-Ukraine | An approach by The New York Times
On the 24th of February Russia violated the “One for all and all for one” International Law Agreement of Article 5 of the NATO treaty. The result was a devastating attack in Ukraine. However, it is not just an attack that will simply be recorded in history. It’s never like that. Behind this attack lie thousands of suffering families, destroyed properties and dreams. The interest of the entire planet in one night turned to the Ukraine-Russia issue. Today, three months later, it is still a topical issue for the press as well. In the recent New York Times article, we observe that the center of interest is the people and not the sterile events. So, we will attempt to analyze the way the newspaper approaches this particular article.
The New York Times prioritizes the Russia-Ukraine issue, as it is at the center of its front page with the title written with big words “At the front, a vicious dance”. The article starts on the front page and ends on the second page. This article highlights the Ukrainian-Russian fighting distance in eastern Ukraine and the Russian show of strength. As we understand it is clear that a newspaper of this scope makes sense to prioritize and analyze this issue and to emphasize in the soldiers. Also, it focuses on the dynamics of each country.
The title of the article vividly describes the situation currently prevailing in the war in Ukraine and matches with other parts of the article like “The impact of a tank round cracked the bunker’s plaster roof and sent uniformed men scrambling” and “Tanks in particular have become a serious menace, fighters said, often coming within a mile of the battalion’s positions and wreaking absolute havoc”. Two camps fighting to occupy a country at all costs. Peace seems far away but the violence of war is very intense. This title helps the reader to understand, think and imagine what war can look like. In our point of view, the title clearly fits the situation that these people are in.
Moreover, this article was signed by the author whose name is Michael Schwirtz. So, it means that this is about to be a validated article. The author is trying to analyze the situation in Ukraine and the conditions that people are living in now given that the war between Ukraine and Russia is still happening. In particular, the author is trying to depict the situation from the perspective of the soldiers and in general the people that are experiencing the war in the front line. Inside the article there are some unchanged words of those people who are describing their moments during the war. The references of the author are declared in a crystal clear way demonstrating and clarifying the opinion of the warriors like the battalion’s commander etc. Consequently, the author is not analyzing his own opinion in the whole text just in some parts like “ after seeing the atrocities committed against noncombatants in Ukraine”. Additionally, the author is demonstrating his opinion basically through the experiences of the people in the battleground describing the horrible moments and devastations that the Russian invasion has created in Ukraine. However, in some parts of the article the author quotes his own comments which of course correspond to reality. For instance “So it goes every day, every hour, for the fighters of the Carpathian Sich Battalion” or “They have not faced an easy fight. The Russian military has deployed an enormous force along this front in eastern Ukraine”.
Furthermore, there are a lot of ways to manipulate the opinion of the readers in one direction. The expression of the author in conjunction with his vocabulary usage can create a specific style for the article commanding the attention of the readers. That is, in this article Michael Schwirtz is choosing to use some adjectives with more intensive meaning. Nevertheless, for the most part the author is not using “intense” vocabulary trying to focus on the facts and the experiences of the persons there. There are some parts, though, in which the author is describing the moments of war with remarkable adjectives. For instance, using adjectives like “ the enemy forces”, “enormous force”, “intense battles”, or “the harsh fluorescent light” the author facilitates his effort of gaining more attention from the readers. This article is describing the circumstances in a war, as a result it becomes clear the fact that he would use the equivalent words to demonstrate the happenings in Ukraine. To sum up, through this type of writing the author is influencing the opinion of the readers as for the seriousness of this issue.
Therefore, as we can conclude from the above, the war between Ukraine and Russia is a very serious issue that affects the whole world and its main results will be seen over time. So, the New York Times and in particular the author Michael Schwirtz quote the facts with respect and clarity so that the world is properly informed. Surely everyone stands against the war, the issue is how they manage and support this attitude to have a beneficial effect and a desired result. After all, a newspaper like this could only provide objective information to its readers. This is, after all, the importance of the online or printed press.
[You can find the article online here]
By ADream Team: Maria Patinioti, leonidas lepidas, Marikelly Laskou, Mirto Theodosopoulou
