Discuss the below:
Q1. How does the news coverage conform to prevailing standards of newsworthiness? What criteria are present in the story? How do these criteria appear to be driving the coverage?
Q2. How does coverage of the story appear to reflect newsgathering routines? What are the most frequently cited sources? Are they predominantly "official, authoritative" sources? How are the sources identified: by name, generically, or anonymously?
Q3. Is a range of viewpoints or agendas represented in the coverage? Have the news outlets taken an explicit editorial stand on your topic? Does that editorial stand appear to influence the rest of the outlet's coverage?
Q4. What about the overall quality of coverage of the story? Is coverage event-driven? Is the story framed in an episodic, discrete, or piecemeal fashion? What kind of broader context is evident? Is there evidence of game-framing?
Q5. In your view, are there clear winners or losers in the coverage you've examined? Have particular politicians, groups, or points of view received noticeably more coverage, or better coverage? Do you think the public was well-served by the coverage you have examined? Why or why not?