I have interpreted an article about the [now current news] Apple FBI iPhone case, 3/2016, titled ‘Congress is disturbed by the FBI director’s lack of tech knowledge’. The title itself paints a picture of an inept Federal agent, and possibly mocks the incident itself. A serious event became a waste of time because of the FBI Director James Comeys poor grasp of technological know-how. The article sets the stage for the audience by introducing the situation, “the FBI and Apple faced off in a Congressional hearing and answered various questions fielded by members of the House Judiciary Committee”.
This type of representation in the news could bring the qualifications of the FBI into public view, who may interpret the meaning of this article to be that the chief of the most relevant law enforcement agency in the world is ‘incompetent’.
This article is unique in that it centered on the politicians and leaders involved, and not the Apple Company. Binary interpretation switches over to the success or failure of the Congressional hearing, the knowledge or lack of technical understanding of the people involved, the progress or lack of development on getting information off the iPhone .
The American ideology is to trust the qualifications of the people and agencies involved in with the governing and security of this country. But this article has several dialog lines, back and forth, between the congressmen and the FBI director, which shatter the reality-representation of how qualified the general public believes the leaders are. Several comments were made in the article about the FBI director. About how he was declining to answer several questions, giving non-satisfactory responses, failing to understand the questions, lacking knowledge, and failed to summon assistance to help him with the responses. None of which generates confidence with how the public will view the agency.