HIS 100 Module Four Activity Bias
docx
keyboard_arrow_up
School
Southern New Hampshire University *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
206
Subject
History
Date
Dec 6, 2023
Type
docx
Pages
3
Uploaded by CoachFieldCobra32
HIS 100 Module Four Activity Template: Bias in Primary Sources
Locate an additional primary source relevant to your historical event. Use it and the primary
source you identified in a previous module to answer the questions below. Replace the
bracketed text with your responses.
Source One
Conduct source analysis on a primary source relevant to your historical event.
Attempt to write the APA style citation for your first primary source and include a link to it. You
will not be penalized for incorrect format.
Alexievich, S. (2006).
Voices from Chernobyl: The oral history of a nuclear disaster (K. Gessen,
Trans.).
Picador. (Original work published 1997)
Respond to the following questions:
Who authored or created the primary source?
o
Svetlana Alexievich authored this primary source. She is Belarusian journalist and a
Russian-language author whose work is mostly comprised of compelling and
uncompromising exposés of the social and political upheaval within the Soviet Union
from the postwar era to the fall of communism. She won the Nobel Prize for Literature in
2015 (Serafin, 2023).
What was the author’s position in society at the time the primary source was created?
o
At the time this was created, Alexievich was regarded as an established oral historian
and investigative journalist living in Minsk.
When was the primary source created?
o
The primary source was created between 1986-1996 through over 500 interviews that
Alexievich conducted with individuals who experienced this event firsthand.
Where was the primary source created, released, or publicized?
o
She conducted these interviews in the surrounding area of Belarus.
Who was the intended audience for the primary source?
o
I believe the intended audience was the world at large. Instead of just relying on the
news media and the government’s conflicting accounts of what happened, she wanted
to give an honest portrayal of what had occurred by giving a voice to those who were
actually there and who were actually affected by the event at hand.
Why was the primary source created?
o
This was created to give the country and citizens their voice back. She wrote this as a
tool to cut through all the political and media misinformation that was being spread and
portrayed.
Whose perspective(s) is presented in the source?
1
o
Quite literally as the title presents, the perspective is from 35 first-hand accounts of
those who were there that day and the affect it had in the ten years that followed, the
“Voices of Chernobyl.”
Source Two
Conduct a source analysis on a primary source relevant to your historical event.
Attempt to write the APA style citation for your second primary source and include a link to it.
You will not be penalized for incorrect format.
Abramowitz, M. (1986, May 2).
INR information memorandum from Morton Abramowitz to the
Secretary of State: Estimate of fatalities at Chernobyl reactor accident.
National Security Archive.
Respond to the following questions:
Who authored or created the primary source?
o
Morton Abramowitz
What was the author’s or creator’s position in society at the time the primary source was
created?
o
Director of the Bureau of Intelligence and Research
When was the primary source created?
o
May 2
nd
, 1986
Where was the primary source created, released, or publicized?
o
It was declassified and released to the public on December 29
th
, 2011
Who was the intended audience for the primary source?
o
US Intelligence was the primary audience for this memo.
Why was the primary source created?
o
This memo reviews early Soviet information received through U.S. intelligence and
speculates about the number of fatalities on the day of the explosion.
Whose perspective(s) is presented in the source?
o
The perspective is that of the US Intelligence committee analyzing this memo and
concluding that what information the Soviets were presenting in that memo was
erroneous. The US intelligence position was that the Soviets were downplaying the
event majorly.
Both Sources
Analyze the primary sources relevant to your historical event for the presence of bias.
I don’t believe there is any real bias in my first source, as it is taken from firsthand accounts of
citizens who were there that day and what the endured in the ten years following Chernobyl.
However, in my second source, there could be bias on both sides. There is certainly bias on the
Soviet Union side, as they were intentionally trying to minimize this event. There is also the Cold
2
War angle that played into not only the Soviet Union trying to minimalize the event but also the
United States were always searching for more ammo to make the Soviet Union the “bad guy” so
to speak.
Compare how your historical event is represented in your primary sources.
In source one, it is represented by the citizens affected by the nuclear disaster. The first-hand
accounts of what happened that day brings the truth to light. In my second source, the US
uncovered a memo in which the Soviet was trying to downplay and minimize what happened at
Chernobyl. The Soviet Union wanted this to be treated as quietly as possible. Through analyzing
the memo and the event at hand, the United States deemed it to not be an accurate
representation.
References:
Serafin, S. R. (2023, May 27).
Svetlana Alexievich
.
Encyclopedia Britannica
.
https://www.britannica.com/biography/Svetlana-Alexievich
3
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help