The first source comes from an article in The Verge, an online magazine. This article's source allows us to attain that it is likely trying to show a certain opinion on the pipeline as well as persuade the reader to think a certain way about the controversy. Nevertheless, Elizabeth Lopatto, the writer, tries to maintain an objective look at the proposed bill that would fund the Keystone XL Pipeline. She however is a science editor and as such is likely writing this article from a scientific perspective, which is allowable since the project deals with the movement of oil and tar and the possible environmental impacts of doing so. This source was published February 5, 2015 which would have been months into the new cycle of congresspeople who had just been elected in 2014. It is likely that these congresspeople were trying to follow up on their promises to either see the pipeline get built or see it get blocked. Thus the approval of the bill in Congress and potential veto by the President would have been the focal background story for all these politicians. This source allows me to see the political battles going on at the time of the veto as well as the divisions of support or opposition. This article shows the political stakeholders who are trying to fulfill their promises to the voting electorate, this is essentially the entire forefront of the controversy itself.
The next source comes from the Daily Caller, an online news source. This website is a site that publishes news articles on a wide variety of subjects, including politics. In other words this is a source that can be trusted as reporting events without much opinion thrown in. The article is written by Chris White, a full time writer for the Daily Caller. Not much else is told about this author. This source was published January 26, 2016 so it is extremely recent and relevant to the story. It talks about a new development in the Pipeline controversy as a group of protesters continually breaks into a Canadian Oil facility causing lock downs. These events are in the same anti-pipeline movements that have swept through environmentalists across Canada and the United States. This gives more background into why people were angry with the Keystone XL Pipeline to begin with while also showing how the controversy has spread to other pipeline projects in North America.
Another source comes from phys.org which is a science website that has covered the controversy for its scientific issues. The article describes where the pipeline would go, who is involved, why it is controversial, and the main economic and energy related impacts. The article does not have a stated author and was written November 6, 2015. This was after the bill and the debate were concluded which would have let the immediate tension in Congress settle. However, as this article proves, the debate and argument continues to go on to this very day even after the bill to build the pipeline was vetoed.
The fourth source comes from the Herald Times which is a local newspaper from Meeker, Colorado. This article comes from a small town which allows us to look at what small towns think about the controversy. The Herald Times attempts to analyze "who killed the Keystone XL Pipeline". It talks about how President Obama partnered with local native tribes to combat the pipeline to protect sacred lands. Essentially the article states how the pipeline created a controversy among the people and how it was killed by the people who want to protect the land. This article was written by Cally Carswell, a reporter for the High Country News who wrote this special for the local paper. This means that this was a collaboration between more than one newspaper. The paper was written January 18, 2016 after many people believe that the pipeline controversy has been killed once and for all.
A fifth source comes from the Houston Chronicle, a local paper in the Houston, Texas region. This article covers the legal challenges which are keeping the pipeline controversy alive despite the bill being vetoed. It talks about the possible lawsuit being issued against the United States by the TransCanada Oil Company. The article is written by Robert Grattan who is a writer for the Chronicle. It was written on January 7,2016 after the potential lawsuit was announced. This article's free version only gives a small amount of information but it gives new information about why this pipeline is still a controversy.
The sixth source comes from the Huffington Post, an online opinion magazine known for its liberal positions on issues. This means they are likely to favor the environmentalists side of the controversy. This explains why they wrote an article about the economic argument against the pipeline. The article was written by Sanjay Kapoor, a Seattle based sustainability and marketing consultant. His experience allows him to understand the complexities behind the economy and allow insight into what problems the pipeline could cause for the economy. This article was written April 22, 2015 just after the bill was passed by Congress and then vetoed. This source allows a clear explanation of one side of the argument in the controversy.
The seventh source is from newsmax.com, a news source that claims to be independent. This source covers everything from entertainment articles to serious articles about politics and science. This article describes five reasons for constructing the pipeline, including the notion that according to sources it wont have many direct impacts on global warming. This article was written by Jerry Shaw, a contributor to newsmax. Not much is known about Jerry Shaw except for his work at newsmax.com. The article was written on March 30, 2015 which is during the time period of the pipeline bill controversy. This article allows me to analyze the arguments for the other side, the pro-pipeline side, of the story.
The eighth source is an article from News.Mic, an online news magazine. This source is a QRG on the pipeline controversy. This source covers politics and other news with added opinion pieces. This article talks about the current state of the pipeline controversy. The article also talks about both sides to the controversy as well as which of the candidates for president might bring up the fight for the pipeline again. This article was written by Liz Rowley, a breaking news specialist based in New York. The reason she wrote this article would be because of the Canadian based oil company wants to sue the United States. The article was written November 3, 2015 around the time when the company was considering suing the federal government.
The ninth source is from an NPR article/podcast; NPR is a national public radio corporation which runs news stories and opinion pieces to be broadcast across the country. This article talks about why and how environmentalists were pushing to stop the pipeline from being built. NPR claims that this was much more than an infrastructure project, it was a battle over the future of energy. This is an evident part of opinion pieces, nevertheless it will be a very useful opinion piece. This article was written by Jeff Brady on January 8, 2015. Jeff Brady is a desk correspondent based in Philadelphia and specializes on energy issues and domestic issues. This article helps us understand the views of the anti-pipeline environmentalist stakeholders.
The tenth source is from an online video essay from AJ+, an online news source that uses video reports to deliver its information. This type of media allows the viewer to directly see and picture the impacted people and areas. The video talks about why the pipeline is a controversy as well as describing whether the pipeline will contribute to climate change. This video was produced by Al Jezeera Media Network. There is no attributed author for the video other than the network itself and there is not a given date for the video although it was uploaded on February 11, 2015 during the period that congress was voting and discussing the pipeline bill.
 |
| Anonymous, "News, Organization, Global" via Pixabay CC0 licence. |
No comments:
Post a Comment