{"id":852,"date":"2026-09-28T14:12:46","date_gmt":"2026-09-28T18:12:46","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/commons.princeton.edu\/jrn449-f26\/?p=852"},"modified":"2026-09-28T14:12:46","modified_gmt":"2026-09-28T18:12:46","slug":"week-4-reflection","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/commons.princeton.edu\/jrn449-f26\/week-4-reflection\/","title":{"rendered":"Week 4 reflection"},"content":{"rendered":"

Azmat Khan\u2019s NYT series did an exceptional job juxtaposing the lived experience of civilians with the apathy and lack of attention shown by the US military and the claims that officials made to the public. I especially appreciated being able to read both of her pieces in the series because it caused me to think about how writing in two different styles can change what the readers take away from the article. For example, in \u201cAirstrikes Allowed America to wage war with minimal risk to its troops,\u201d Khan includes information about her methodology of conducting interviews. Specifically, she notes that she didn\u2019t contact anyone before arriving to limit awareness that she is coming, and thus bias. This was interesting to me because I had never considered awareness of forthcoming interviews to be considered the root of bias. She explains that \u201cevidence could be doctored; stories could be aligned.\u201d I found this to be a great way to bring more credibility to Khan and her witnesses because it demonstrates that she is considering the possibility that the witnesses may try to deceive her. However, she of course also demonstrates great empathy towards the civilians. Thus, this style of writing allowed her to include accounts of her methodology, which allows space for strengthening her credibility.<\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

This piece also helps strengthen Khan\u2019s credibility by explaining more context behind her experience in the field, and decisions she had to make as well as the reasoning behind these decisions. I appreciated how that style of journalism helped humanify the writer, which I believe makes her message able to reach more people, especially those who are a bit more closed minded to these types of messages. I also find the headline of this article to be worth discussion. This headline seems almost geared towards people who have a positive outlook on America\u2019s involvement in the war, and who would believe that America is a hero in this situation. This makes me think that the article was written in this way to try to get to Americans who would not normally start reading articles that claim wrong doings by the American army in hopes of penetrating the polarizing nature of politics in America.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\u00a0\u201cIn Hidden Pentagon Records reveal Patterns of Failure in Deadly Airstrikes,” however, Khan takes more of an impersonal writing style. She includes more context behind the US military\u2019s procedures and thought processes, while showing the stark contrast between their apathy and the lived experience of the civilians. Thus, I thought reading these two very different articles that were written by the same person, about the same events was very interesting, and I will take this into account when planning for my Berlin article.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

In the Holy boarders vs EU boarders article, I was specifically drawn to this quote: \u201cthe heightened scrutiny on places of worship giving sanctuary to refugees reflects hardening attitudes towards immigrants in general.\u201d As I wrote my news piece on Malta, I was particularly interested in how attitudes towards refugees intersects with attitudes towards immigrants in general, since I was speaking with a student in Malta who has witnessed blanket disrespect towards all immigrants. Thus, it was interesting to see this correlation between scrutiny against refugees reflecting scrutiny against all immigrants.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Azmat Khan\u2019s NYT series did an exceptional job juxtaposing the lived experience of civilians with the apathy and lack of attention shown by the US military and the claims that officials made to the public. I especially appreciated being able to read both of her pieces in the series because it caused me to think<\/p>\n

Continue Reading<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":7981,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-852","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized","post-preview"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/commons.princeton.edu\/jrn449-f26\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/852","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/commons.princeton.edu\/jrn449-f26\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/commons.princeton.edu\/jrn449-f26\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/commons.princeton.edu\/jrn449-f26\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/7981"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/commons.princeton.edu\/jrn449-f26\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=852"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/commons.princeton.edu\/jrn449-f26\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/852\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":853,"href":"https:\/\/commons.princeton.edu\/jrn449-f26\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/852\/revisions\/853"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/commons.princeton.edu\/jrn449-f26\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=852"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/commons.princeton.edu\/jrn449-f26\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=852"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/commons.princeton.edu\/jrn449-f26\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=852"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}