Journal Two

The Huffington Post has proved to be one of my favorite resources for news on the internet. I feel that, for the most part, the Huff Post manages a good balance between news and opinion. However, I recently read an article that was somewhat frustrating in its subtle insertion of opinion over fact.

David Bromwich, a Professor of Literature at Yale, wrote an article entitled "What 9/11 Makes Us Forget"on the Saturday before September 11. The article is tricky - there are a lot of books quoted, people quoted and factual information interspersed with very bold claims and accusations. The quotes Bromwich chooses to use in the article are largely one-sided and contribute mostly to the point he is trying to make. There are whole paragraphs dedicated solely to Bromwich's ideas about September 11, 2001 and the "disgusting" politics involved. I think that this may be an opinion piece, however it is categorized under "Politics News", and can be found on the front page of the site along with other news stories. This caused confusion and I could only assume that this was meant to be a news piece as well as an opinion piece. This piece is so strongly biased and strongly opinionated that, although I may agree with some of the things it is saying, I cannot take it to be good journalism.

An article that I really enjoyed reading based on its "truthiness" is by John Dorschner for the Miami Herald, titled, "Undocumented Immigrant and federal fugitive costs taxpayers $350,000 at Miami-Dade hospitals". The first thing that struck me about this article was the fact that the author chose not to use the term "Illegal Immigrant". Using such a term would have immediately had negative connotations and readers would have immediately had a certain idea about the subject of the article. I feel that Dorschner tried to handle the article in as unbiased a way as he possibly could. Throughout the article, Dorschner handles his subject, who is illegal and a criminal, by fact, in a very fair and unbiased way. He presents all the facts, using quotes from outside sources to present a story. He doesn't only use quotes from one source, or sources leaning entirely in one direction, but uses multiple different views to help strengthen the news. He even uses the subject's wife in his article which, although may lean towards one side, presents a view opposite to those expressed by the people the criminal took advantage of. Two sides of the story are shown, and all opinions are supported by quotes and factual information, making this a reliable and dependable source of news for me.

In my weeks of following different sources for news, I've found that the most dependable sources, and the ones I go back to most often, are the sources that cover all the bases and use facts and varied quotes to back up any claims. The sources that promote a general "truthiness" and a certain fairness are the ones I find to be most respectable in journalistic endeavors. I will not stop reading pieces that are more opinionated or biased, however I will take them with a grain of salt and understand the differences between honest and dishonest journalism.