What Comes To Pass

The anatomy of a BBC news post:

This post in particular

Part one: The headline.

The headline must take whatever truth there is to glean from the article and distort it by heavy contraction to suit the editor's desired effect:

"US-Shia clash erupts in Baghdad"

Naturally, anyone who reads that headline (as I did) assumes that this is an outbreak of fighting between the Shia majority population of Iraq and US forces.

Part two: The article.

Upon admitting that in fact this was a clash between Moqtada Al Sadr's militia (who handily happen to be Shia) and the US and not some large-scale sect-wide civilian uprising, make sure you get quotes from the armed forces and of course, the terrorists. In order to ensure that there is no bias, put equal emphasis on both because they are each equally reputable sources after all.

Now, just jump overboard and give the subtitle to the terrorists: 'We were attacked'.

Finally sprinkle the article with some awesome interjections, which don't actually have even a tangential connection with the previous paragraph but which suit the tone you're trying to give the piece:

The confrontation was settled when Mr Sadr agreed to enter the political process, and the militia handed over its heavy weaponry in a cash-for-weapons programme.

But the BBC's Caroline Hawley in Baghdad says the new fighting comes at a time of tension in southern Iraq between British troops and Mr Sadr's followers.

Awesome. I think I'm getting the hang of this. '3 Insurgents killed during arrests made in east Baghdad' becomes 'Shia majority clashes with zionist occupying forces'.

Later

John