Weekly Response (make up) 11/23

Today, the New York Times really disappointed me. I have to admit that I have yet to read the article that I am about to write on, but its content attracted me, as it took up the center of the website and seemed extremely unimportant. All I can say is that I hope to one day be paid to write articles about bulldog breeding, and have them take center-stage to greater world issues, like the leader of Yemen ending his rule, etc.

Now I have to admit I have been slightly wrong. While I still feel that this longer piece may not have deserved center stage, it was a wonderfully written article. The writer set up a scene before jumping into the piece, using fantastic details that really drew me in, even though I'd initially been opposed to reading the article. You could also tell that the writer had done his research; I felt that I was educated about something I knew relatively nothing about, but not in a patronising way - it was easy. The quotes were also great; either the writer lucked out or had a plethora of quotes to choose from, because they were quirky but added greatly to the overall piece. This piece was almost more of a feature story than a news article, and I must admit that I enjoyed reading it more than I would've liked to.

I really appreciate how the Huffington Post now has an entire online section dedicated to the OWS movement and articles relating to it. I chose to read one about a protestor passing on a note to Obama about the police brutality around the country during a hand shaking session. It was a short read, and intended to be so, but it fell a little flat for me. While I did appreciate the quotes from Obama (though indirect) and the exact text that was on the note, I would've really appreciated a comment from a protestor that was there, or someone else from the audience who witnessed when the protestors originally interrupted Obama's speech. This just makes me question what makes big news vs. small news, and where priorites are given. If it's a smaller article, is it okay to neglect certain aspects of the article, just to get a short story across? I'm personally quite confused on the appropriate way to report on a situation like this.