When reading two news stories both from the news media in Nepal, I discover journalists may indicate different attitudes and stances.
The first story ‘back to the village campaign’ from Nepali Times, describes the young female students in rural regions can hardly accept high-qualified education, because of deficiency of the skilled teachers and teaching facilities. Journalists use objective and rational discourse to manifest the situation. However, the second story- ‘Lost in Lambirds: The students smuggled to St Lucia deserve an answer from the state’, describes the students and their families have been cheated to spend Rs 2 million enrolling in the institution for being transferred to an American college. It is obvious to see emotional and sympathetic mood. For instance, ‘These stories show the sorry state our country and our youths are in.’ or ‘the students smuggled to St Lucia deserve an answer from the state’.
As Andrew R. Cline mentioned, what journalism actually does is serve the middle and upper classes, because of its market-driven characteristic. Journalists normally with relatively high income and reputations have developed a class bias. They will unconsciously reveal their different stances and attitudes to the different social classes.
Those students in the second articles must be the richer ones in Nepal, compared to those in the first story.As a result, the reporter emotionally blames the problematic education system, just like ‘their family members’ in the second story.