Over the past weeks, President Biden has been ordering soldiers to withdraw from the middle east. Unfortunately, the U.S military admitted to killing 10 civilians in a bombing, seven being children and one being an aid worker, who were mistaken for being associated with ISIS.

Appealing to feelings

The article details the majority of positive acts Zemerai Ahmadi, the aid worker, did in the span of his life. They emphasize how hardworking and how close he was successful in detailing his profession and including the fact of his nearly confirmed refugee status. Pathos is further enacted by implementing pictures with captions to cause the reader to visualize how detrimental the situation is.

Seeing both sides
Throughout the article, the reasons for defending the bombing are inserted in multiple instances. From the excerpt comes “The Pentagon described the accidental killing of Ahmadi as a result of the frenzied evacuation…”. While it is important to see both sides of the conflict, sentences inserted as so should not influence the main standpoint being that US Military was wrong.

The Halo Affect
As reported in the article, Biden was seen publicly traveling to his vacation home after said incident. He remained silent as stated in “He said nothing to reporters on his way out of the White House or upon arrival in Delaware. On first notice, this action gives Biden a poor look, giving him a negative outlook to outside viewers. His silence comes off as uncaring and unbothered. While this may be a justified first thought, its also possible for him to have a contingency already in motion about the situation

Being primed on prior information

Biden’s eligibility of being a president has been a topic through the first year of his term, as early as his first month in. Multiple news outlets/talk shows have nit-picked his ideals and speaking habits during his speeches. From an uninvolved individual, this a very common starting view of Biden (being an incapable elder) forming an already negative bias around him. This already present bias affects the objectivity of Biden in this specific situation, already deducing him as an incapable leader.

Take into account the author of said article and their potential bias.

This article is presented on New York Post news site by Steven Nelson. Steven Nelson has numerous articles in his catalog pertaining to Biden’s decisions. One title of his works is “Biden’s dad worked for corrupt union group that got federal funds, the book claims” without reading clouds Biden in a negative cloud. There are more articles that also do the same, giving off the author, Steven Nelson, who already doesn’t approve of Biden himself and holds a negative bias.

Letting logic effect the situation 
 Nelson’s article provides points that were stated by Pentagon. These points are used to provide a logical reason for why the attacks were sent out. An example comes from the Pentagon stating “the strike was a successful mission to prevent another bombing of the Kabul airport…”. This alone can sway readers in a more favorable way to the side of the U.S and cause them to agree. It is important to not let the use of logic take away from the subject of the article