Learning!

I love it when I read an article in the paper that teaches me something. I know, I know, how very nerdy of me, but seriously- how often is it that you find an article about a subject you know very little about and you learn something? It's hard enough to do this in schools let alone the paper.

This article took advertising and taught me something new. It took a subject that I know nothing about and broke it down so I could understand. Not only that but it brought me up to speed on what is happening in the advertising world now. It used simple language and brought in names that everyone would know to give the reader something to relate to. (For example, we all know about the AT&T ads, but what we didn't know was that they were suing Verizon.) Anyway, this article was great in my opinion and I now know a whole lot more about the advertisement industry.

Reactions

Today's article talked about a piece of news that was received with many mixed feelings. The United States Preventive Services Task Force has declared that women should not start going in for mammograms until age 50.

Some women viewed this information as a relief. No longer would they have to go through the excruciating process that is breast cancer screening until they were 50. However, many other women were skeptical about this new statement. Why was it being released? How did the United States Preventive Services Task Force know what they were talking about?

This article did a good job taking a lot of different issues and presenting them in a non-biased way. In addition, it was about to show the confusion and emotion that came as a result of the announcement. I like how even though some of the quotes in the article didn't say anything specific, they were included to help show how women have reacted to the news. For example: "'Why all of a sudden this change?' said Karen Sun, 41, who was loading her groceries into her car here in Los Angeles.'“It feels out of nowhere.'" This seemingly casual exchange gave the article the ability to show the "peoples" reaction.

Fun article

This article was a fun and interesting read. Apparently, Facebook can save your life or at least it did in the case of Rodney Bradford. The article thankfully realized the humor in Facebook saving someone's life and made sure not to make the article too serious. They did, however, make sure to include all the information necessary for the article to be complete. It was not just a fluff piece, but it does include some sarcasm and humor throughout the paper.

Although the article shows the importance of Facebook in this case. It makes sure to keep the readers grounded by including information about how Facebook cannot be used as the only source to prove someone's innocence. Facebook was only used to help further prove Bradfords innocence. "The Facebook entry was just “icing on the cake,” since his client had other witnesses who provided an alibi."

Sniper Execution

For a girl who can vividly remember the "duck and cover" exercises that students had to perform in schools throughout the DC area, this article really hit home with me. I think the structure and writing style of the article were both great especially for a topic that is so old. Although the sniper was only executed today, it's been over seven years since his attacks.

The article does a good job of covering something that may not be in the forefront of everyone's minds anymore, and still making it significant. It didn't spend an overly long time talking about the events of the past, but gave just enough evidence of the crimes to remind readers why he was being sentenced to death today. In addition, he gave plenty of information on how his sentence was arranged and why it took place today without making it sound like a rule book instead of a newspaper article.

Abortion in Healthcare

Articles about the health care reform legislation have ranged in all sorts of subjects and most of them end up in the front page of the paper. However, today's health care article featured the abortion part of the legislation. In the version of legislation that the House passed, there would be a block on "the use of federal money for 'any health plan that includes coverage of abortion,' except in the case of rape or incest or if the life of a pregnant woman is in danger."

It was an interesting article that took a subtle look at the balance of power between Congress and the executive branch. Instead of directly talking about where the President was struggling to get Congress to cooperate, it stated the facts and showed an example- abortion. Even between the two branches of Congress there are differences. The abortion issue is only part of a number of changes that members of the Senate are hoping to make in the health care legislation.

Style Section

Today I found an interesting article in the style section. Sure it may talk about fashion, but here is an instance where fashion directly translates into the civil rights of students. These students are dealing with a fight that has much more at stake then when we used to fight for the tank top width to be two fingers instead of three. It was interesting to see the perspective of both the principals and the students. Without a principals perspective I don't think we could have easily understood the complexity of the issue.

I also enjoyed how the articles lead was unique. Instead of using the simple who what when where why how paragraph this author had a quirky "math problem" and questions. He was still able to answer the 5 w's and 1 h questions but chose to do so in a more interesting and attention grabbing way.

Fat People Have Feelings Too.

Today's article surprised me. It talked about overweight Americans and how they are starting to weigh in on the healthcare debates. It didn't mention a lot of specifics but it did give a good overarching view about the general sentiment of overweight Americans. Although the connection between overweight people and the health care debates wasn't very interesting to me. The idea of "fat pride" was bizarre and fascinating to me.

I think the article should have focused more on the general American sentiment that being overweight means that you're not healthy. Instead of showing the reader why this sentiment isn't true, the author just assumed that this was common knowledge and focused instead on how this sentiment was being expressed during the healthcare debates. I don't want to seem inconsiderate, but I always assumed that fat people were unhealthy and that most fat people are trying to work towards being the proper weight. The idea of "fat pride" is a completely new concept for me- and while I totally believe in being confident in your own body, I think never considered the idea of a healthy fat person who should be prideful of their body. I think an article talking more about "fat pride" would have been more interesting to me.

Comparing Leads...

Since the shootings at Fort Hood, Texas, three different articles have been written about the incident. Two from the New York Times and one from the Washington Post. I'm going to use this blog entry to compare the leads in these three articles.

Post: "An Army psychiatrist, trained to treat soldiers under stress, allegedly opened fire Thursday in a crowded medical building at Fort Hood, Tex. When the assault ended minutes later, the attack had become what is believed to be the largest mass shooting ever to occur on a U.S. military base. Twelve were killed, 31 wounded."

Times 1: "An Army psychiatrist facing deployment to one of America’s war zones killed 12 people and wounded 31 others on Thursday in a shooting rampage with two handguns at the sprawling Fort Hood Army post in Central Texas, military officials said."

Times 2: "WASHINGTON — Born and reared in Virginia, the son of immigrant parents from a small Palestinian town near Jerusalem, he joined the Army right out of high school, against his parents’ wishes. The Army, in turn, put him through college and then medical school, where he trained to be a psychiatrist."

I think the article that provided the most information was Times 1. The lead is short and to the point, but gives the all the relevant information in a simple way. The Post lead is also good, although a little wordy, but it doesn't talk about the "why." You can argue that because we don't know the reasons why Hasan shot at the crowd yet, it shouldn't be included but the fact that he was soon to be deployed seems important to me.

The second times article's lead is nothing like the other two. We can't figure out 'everything we need to know' from this lead at all. The article, unlike the other two articles, focuses on Hasan, his history and possible reasons for his actions. Without the other Times article, this article would be useless, because it doesn't explain what happened at all. I happened to read this article first, and was very confused by the end.

Good Article

I really appreciated this article's subject. It was an article discussing the protests that have been going on in Iran since the elections this summer. Recently, most articles in the paper about Iran solely mention their nuclear plans and it seems as though everyone has forgotten how illegitimate the Iranian government of today is. Thankfully, this article discussed how the usual Nov. 4th anti-American rallies may be taken over by anti-government rallies from the green movement.

Although the article's subject was great and probably very difficult to receive seeing as any information from Iran about opposition movements is difficult to come by from a credible source, the writing was a little weak. For example, the lead wasn't until the third paragraph and a lot of the information was broad. For example, "Thousands of reformist figures were arrested in the unrest that followed the election, and many remain in jail." I for one would appreciate some harder numbers. However, the subject out-weighed the writing in this case, still making this a solid article.