Russian Plane Crash

Russian Plane Crash: Britain, concerned about Russian Plane Crash, Halts Sinai Flights

Wreckage viewed several days after the explosion

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/05/world/europe/britain-russia-plane-crash-egypt-sharm-el-sheikh.html?emc=edit_na_20151104&nlid=73036745&ref=cta&_r=0

By: Stephen Castle

Published: November 4, 2015

Who: British Prime Minister David Cameron and all aboard flight 9268

What: Cameron stops all flights going into and around the Sinai area due to the evidence rising about the nature of the flight crash. It appears that there was a bomb planted on the flight which suggests an act of terrorism and Isis has taken claim to the tragedy.

Where: Prime Minister of England lives in England, the plane crashed in Sinai, Egypt

Why: Because the bomb seems to have been planted on the plane and a major terrorist group (Isis) is publicly announcing they were responsible, there is worry that there are further threats around the Sinai area where the plane exploded in midair. However, there is little evidence thus far that Isis group was actually the culprit. Even so, the British government is taking precautions.

When: October 31, 2015

Summary: After footage of the plane's explosion from satellites surfaced along with analysis of the wreckage it was apparent that it was likely that a bomb was planted on the plane. In light of this Isis has been very eager to publicly claim responsibility for the incident. In response, the British Prime Minister has closed off flights from Britain to the Sinai area in efforts to keep his citizens safe from possible other acts of terrorism.

Bias: There is little detectable bias in this article. Both support and speculation about whether or not it was a bomb and whether Isis was really behind the incident or not were both supported with equal evidence and reasoning. Additionally, the announcement of the Prime Minister's decision was announced in a very factual manner and the facts presented to support and question his decision were also presented in equal amounts. The vocabulary chosen was not dramatic or persuasive but, rather,  simple and informative. No facts presented were outrageous or commonly known as incorrect and all in all, there was no detectable bias in this article.