The first article that piqued my interest was from the New York Times, composed by three journalists on the accusations against Herman Cain surrounding sexual harassment. Interestingly enough, only the day before an article had been posted quoting Cain saying that the accusations were unfounded. However, this article describes a pay-off a woman received after reporting that Cain had made her uncomfortable while working for the National Restaurant Association.
One aspect of this article that I found very interesting was the omittance of names of people that provided the Times with the information. While I understand the need for anonymity in such a high profile article, it had an negative effect on me as the reader. For some odd reason, I wanted to know exactly where these claims come from, even though I believe them already. By further supporting the article using information that "friends" of the victim gave to the Times, I was even more impacted. The term "friend" relayed to me a certain relationship with the victim - one that may have an effect on what was said, and what they believed to be true.
This weak support only improved halfway through the article when the woman's lawyer was quoted, and a name was given. Finally, I had a trusted source to help me comprehend the article. The journalists also did a great job of quoting him in an appropriate manner. However, I would've preferred to see this quote higher up in the article, as the claims seem to just be hearsay until that moment.
An article for the Baltimore Sun about a bypassed death penalty used quotes in a journalistically appropriate manner, though I felt that they did not add as much to the article as they should have. While I understand the importance of including quotes in any article, this article made me realise the detriments of having extremely dry quotes. The quotes were boring, dry and didn't add much to the comprehension and interest of the article. There was only one good quote, that offered one lawyer's passionate words about the case. The rest of the quotes merely reiterated what was said in a manner that I found completely unnecessary. Striving for a combination of the two (interesting and comprehensive) would, for me, be ideal for an article.
No comments:
Post a Comment