These next articles are in relation to reports alleging
Iran had an underground and secret uranium plant –  

LEAKED IAEA REPORT FINGERS

IRAN 19 April 2007SBS 6.30pm TV World News Transcripts http://global.factiva.com.ezproxy.uow.edu.au:2048/ha/default.aspx

This article is an exclusive on leaked reports claiming “
Iran is closer than ever to making weapons-grade uranium.”The Advertiser (20^thApril) follows the discovery of the underground  uranium enrichment plant at Natanz and sees Iranian’s continuation in producing nuclear fuel an attempt to raise “the stakes in
Iran’s showdown with world powers.” Access article at http://global.factiva.com.ezproxy.uow.edu.au:2048/ha/default.aspx under “
Iran raises the stakes by producing nuclear fuel” The article carries a distrusting undertone – below are excerpts from the article “Iran has been upping the ante in a standoff with the United Nations Security Council, which has demanded an enrichment halt over suspicions
Tehran’s declared civilian nuclear fuel project is a cover for mastering the means to build atom bombs.
Tehran says it wants only nuclear-generated electricity.” “
Iran’s concealment of sensitive enrichment research from the agency and tonewalling of enquiries have snapped confidence in its intentions”   “Diplomats treated the disclosure sceptically pending confirmation from the Vienna-based agency. To that end, the agency note says, its inspectors visited the plant on April 15-16 and learned 1312 centrifuges, divided into eight cascades, or fuel-cycle networks, were operational. “Some” uranium was being fed into them.”

The news values covered here is timeliness, impact and consequence and conflict. News principals also evident, “first loyalty is to citizens” “it must provide a forum for public and criticism and compromise”  

I’ve been looking at the past weeks news articles regarding the
Iran’s nuclear fuel debate.

I found that the majority of articles (worldwide) have focused mainly around the two sanctions imposed on Iran by the Security Council because of fears that Iran will use the nuclear plant to create nuclear weapons.

The Sydney Morning Herald (April 22^nd) placed more emphasis on
Iran’s feelings toward the sanctions and uses quotes for reinforcement –

“The Security Council has no right to take this right away from the people”

“Exploiting peaceful nuclear technology is a legitimate and indispensable right of the Iranian people”

-Manouchehr Mottaki

The AFX International Focus (20^th April) quoted Akbar Hashemi  in relation to the sanctions “we will not give up our rights but we can guarantee that we are following the peaceful path in the nuclear sector and will not take the military path”

BBC Monitoring Middle East (20th April) coveys that
Iran is being “bullied” by the West. “Ahmadinezhad’s serious warning about the illegal and bullying behaviour of some of the global powers in Iran’s nuclear case and stressing that they should not take measures that make the Iranian people – contrary to their inclination and their move in the peaceful path – change their mind in following the laws that have been made by them, was in fact giving an ultimatum against the West’s bullying an ultimatum that was not given yesterday just by the president, but by many authorities and the people.”

“Reaching the last nuclear phase, despite the extensive pressures exerted by some of the Western countries that have turned the Security Council into a tool for their political bullying, is in fact the proof that levers such as sanctions and political games are not effective. The country’s increasing advancements in these fields showed that these methods do not have any positive achievements for the ones taking advantage of them; and at the same time, the experience of these countries should have proven them coercion and threats have only had opposite results for them.”

And the Iranian’s goals – “Iran says it wants to generate nuclear electricity to allow it to export more of its valuable oil and gas.”

Generally, the articles from various publications carry the same theme, about the sanctions imposed and Iran’s reactions. They all touch on the news principals such as “it must strive to make the significant interesting and relevant” “its first loyality is to its citizens”

Impact and consequence – at the moment, it is unsure what impact and consequences the production of nuclear fuel will have – hence the debate between the countries. The production could have a positive impact on Iran by generating nuclear electricity, or it could have a very negative impact on the rest of the world if
Iran chooses to create nuclear weapons at the plant.

Conflict – major conflict between
Iran and the United Nations. It appears
Iran is fighting a battle with the rest of the world

Timeliness – the story can be considered as breaking news as it has the possibility to affect every country all over the world.

Proximity – terrorism is a world spread issue and a major factor in nuclear fuel production, I think every news organisation has an invested interest in
Iran at this time.

Currency – when this story first came out, it was apparent that it would be ongoing

On April 29th, Iran’s Mahmoud Ahmadinejad announced that it would “attend a regional conference on Iraq later this week, setting the stage for the first cabinet-level meeting between Iran and the United States since the end of 2004.”  (New York Times, April 30)

The New York Times published this story on the 30th of April, with other publications such as The Sydney Morning Herald and the UK independent releasing their stories later on May 1st.

It’s also interesting to note the length of the articles by the three papers. The Times uses about 950 words for their article, the SMH uses just over 550 and the UK Independent uses just 270 words. The importance of the article to the publication is evident in the amount of explanation offered by the paper and determined by how interested their audience will be in the story – this refers to proximity.

All articles refer to Condoleezza Rice which adds the news value of prominence to the story and use her quotes to support the story.

“This is not a meeting about the United States and Iran,” Dr Rice told ABC News.

“This is a meeting about Iraq.” (SMH, May 1)

 Other news values employed are impact and consequence, currency and conflict.   

 The UK Independant focused more on Ms Rice than the other two papers, including

“Ms Rice, who has been subpoenaed by the Democratic Congress to testify about the administration’s pre-war claims about Iraq’s alleged pursuit of nuclear weapons, was speaking 48 hours before President Bush vetoes a $124.2bn (£62bn) war spending bill that includes a timeline for withdrawing US forces from Iraq.” – which was omitted from the other papers (http://news.independent.co.uk/world/politics/article2496685.ece)