The article, “Team Obama takes politically correct approach, ignores science” shows bias, unbalance with a hint of balance writing. First, the Fox News reporter’s main argument is based on the issue that Obama and Friedman try to be politically correct when it comes to the isolation of potential Ebola victims. This idea represents the unbalanced nature of this article. The reporter, Betsy McCaughey, only discusses how “team Obama,” thinks that victims would be stigmatized if isolated. They don’t take into consideration the dangerous consequences of contracting Ebola. McCaughey emphasizes that ‘team Obama” isn’t taking the necessary precautions to keep the virus from spreading. McCaughey then continues her argument by providing her audience with facts about Ebola. She makes four scientific statements about the virus to make a point that Ebola can be caught and easily spread. For example, one scientific statement she makes is that “one in seven people don’t have a fever before diagnosis.” This means that if a doctor who was helping Ebola infected patients in West Africa travels back to the US, that doctor can spread the virus if not quarantined for 21 days. But because Friedman decided to monitor doctors who come back from West Africa instead of quarantining them, the chance of others getting the virus is increased
Overall, the article is written in a biased manner but shows a glimpse of balanced journalism. In the previous paragraph I discussed that the article was written in an unbalanced manner because it emphasized what “team Obama” was doing wrong. On the other hand, the story shows balance when Friedman is quoted about his Ebola regulation policies. If the story were entirely unbalanced then Friedman’s thoughts would be unreported. Therefore, this article leans more towards being a piece of unbalanced journalism.