Published in Monday the twenty-third of September's edition of the Courier-Journal on page A8 was an article about Obama not accepting the current gun laws because they do not adequately protect the people. This article was written by Nedra Pickler and titled "Obama Won't Quit on Guns." It tells about a memorial event that was held for the relatives of those killed in the Washington Navy Yard shooting. This article includes many quotes and examples explaining how and why President Obama feels the rules must change. It also violates many of the principles and yardsticks: verification, local relevance, inclusive, context, and explanation.
It lacks verification. Obama's side is the only opinion given. The author should have asked some people who attended the event about their opinion on Obama's views about the gun laws. They would have added more to the story and could have helped the reader to understand the importance of these laws. Since these other sources are not included, the event that is featured isn't really connected to citizens of Kentucky. The story of what happened is very important to the people since it raised these questions about gun laws and it was a tragic event.
Local relevance is not fully included. Some of the article is very well written and tells about president Obama's proposed change in gun laws, which do affect people. Toward the end of the article the event Mr. Obama led is highlighted. As mentioned, it is not connected to the local people because it doesn't give any information except that the president held a memorial for the victims and family members of the shooting. In order to accomplish local relevance, the writer of this article should have included more ways that this event affects local people and what the effects of President Obama talking to these people may be.
The article isn't inclusive. It doesn't communicate who, if anyone, opposes these laws and why people feel in that way. Quotes are given about Mr. Obama's campaign for these changes, but not any other officials views. To fix the problem of inclusiveness the author should talk to other important people who may have other feelings about the ideas.
Context seems to be missing. Not enough sources are used to keep the topic relevant, and inclusive. Only the views of one person, President Obama, are given. They should fix this in the same way that verification, local relevance, and inclusive should be fixed.
The explanation within this article is not high enough. This story only focuses on what happened and briefly on why. It never tells why it is significant to anyone besides the people within the article. This can be fixed by simply explaining in more detail why President Obama feels this way and why it is important to everyone.
Overall, this article misses many of the key yardsticks and principles of journalism. It is noninclusive, not relevant to the local people, missing sources, and non-explanatory. All of the things that were not included within the article could have been easily added or fixed. With further review mistakes could have been prevented. The article does a great job of following some of the principles but still is missing many components that are necessary to good journalism.
No comments:
Post a Comment