Andrea Varnava- New York Times

The New York Times

Thousands Die as Quake-Spawned Waves Crashed Onto Coastlines Across Southern Asia

This story is indeed very different from both the other newspapers. The post gave minimal information on the actual event; the Guardian gave information about the event a few years after it had happened while the New York Times told us exactly what had happened. It shows us what had actually happened, which countries were affected and how badly. They also tell us how many casualties there were. The NY Times also reports that “it took several hours in some cases on Sunday for the waves to build and reach their targets after the earthquake struck. But none of the most affected countries had warning systems in place to detect the earthquake struck. But none of the most affected countries had warning systems in place to detect the coming onslaught and alert the citizens to move away from the coastline.” Maybe if there was some type of system some peoples lives could have been saved. They also report that this devastating quake was the fourth most powerful in 100 years. There were many casualties, “in Indonesia there were reportedly 4,500 dead; in Sri Lanka at least 6,000 were dead; in India an estimated 2,300 were dead and in Tamil Nadu there were at least 1,700 confirmed dead.” There were many tourists that were in those areas because of the peak of tourist and holiday season. “Reuters reported looting in Sri Lanka, and officials said that at least 200 prisoners had escaped from a prison in Matara, about 100 miles south of Colombo, after it was damaged by the tsunami.” This tsunami affected everything in these people’s lives. “Hundreds of thousands of people are homeless, crowed into unsanitary temporary shelters, and bodies are likely to wash up for days.” The New York Times actually got you to feel like you were there and was experiencing the pain these people were going through. It was tough to read but at the same time it was the truth.

Questions:

1) 1) The audience seems to be anyone and everyone who wants to know about what is going on in other parts of the world. They are trying to get the help of anybody that can help by donating money, supplies, food, or even a helping hand to rebuild these people’s lives. I don’t think there is a direct quote that would indicate this but I do think that the entire article as a whole works in such a way that it implies it.

2) 2) The “villain” in this cause isn’t necessarily human it actually was the tsunami. Even though it was a natural disaster this was the major cause of destruction, devastation, and death.

3) 3) I think that everyone in this story is a hero they survived a horrific event and for those that didn’t they were the poor victims. Specifically the India; “reeling from its own casualties, found itself trying to assist its smaller neighbors.” Now that’s being a hero that was truly amazing that people that are hurting themselves from the same event can go and help others is truly remarkable. It shows how people really come together in times of need.

4) 4) As I have stated before one of the main differences are that they are in different time periods. Ones very recent the other is almost two years later while the third is one day after. The NY Times also goes in depth with their story while the others don’t.