Hard News and Feature Story
The first piece is a hard news article. Foreign and domestic policy are the two hot topics of the moment. It also happens to be an intersection of two interests of mine. The article in point is a piece of hard news that could be categorized as breaking. It’s very important information, but it’s not extremely urgent in nature. The story was filed from Washington D.C by Julie Hirschfeld Davis, therefore byline and dateline are present. In this case, government action is the topic at hand, which can also be identified as the beat. More information would be necessary to know if this is the journalist’s particular beat, but it would be safe to assume it is. A publication like the times assigns journalists to specific areas of coverage to journalists that are, in general, seasoned in what they are covering.
Being the New York Times, the article follows a series of journalistic standards that preclude the writer from incurring in some obvious improper editorializing. Hard facts, properly backed figures, quotes with proper attribution (Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and Senior Advisor to the President Stephen Miller, for example) can be found throughout the piece.
The Times has a very clear editorial line that leans on the left side of the political spectrum. Without improperly editorializing, there’s usually a choice of language and rhetoric, as well as the placement of the article that acts like a telltale sign of the paper’s political affiliation. The new number of refugees accepted (30,000) is mentioned in contrast with the previous amount of refugees accepted in the country (45,000). There’s also mention of the 800,000 individuals already in the country that await to be granted refugee status as well. While government sources are quoted, there’s a sense of criticism that permeates the piece through the voice of Nazanin Ash, the vice president for policy and advocacy at the International Rescue Committee, as well as the comparison of refugees allowed during this administration and George W. Bush’s, especially after 9-11.
The second story is clearly a feature. It’s a story that could have been in yesterday’s issue, as well as it could have been published a month from now. Marc Benioff, the subject, is a San Francisco tech mogul who has recently acquired Time Magazine. It’s an important piece of news because the magazine is a well established New York-based institution that can influence public opinion. We find quotes from acquaintances, from Benioff itself and other subjects related to him or his business. Figures seem to be some of the most predominant hard facts that we can find throughout the story. “This week he stepped out onto a broader stage, purchasing Time magazine with his wife, Lynne, for $190 million”. This is a significant piece of information that sets the context for the article and the world it's describing. Later, we learn that “in early 2000 — right as Salesforce was starting up — the internet pioneer AOL bought Time Warner for $165 billion”. As said before, friends and other individuals relevant to the story are quoted, as well as Benioff himself, although his answers are somewhat short and vague. Facts, such as figures and dates, are the real “meat” of the story. Even though there’s some historical information about Benioff and the companies he worked for, there’s no real input from him in this piece that shapes an interesting profile.
Article 1: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/17/us/politics/trump-refugees-historic-cuts.html?action=click&module=Top%20Stories&pgtype=Homepage
Article 2: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/17/technology/time-marc-benioff.html?action=click&module=Top%20Stories&pgtype=Homepage
Being the New York Times, the article follows a series of journalistic standards that preclude the writer from incurring in some obvious improper editorializing. Hard facts, properly backed figures, quotes with proper attribution (Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and Senior Advisor to the President Stephen Miller, for example) can be found throughout the piece.
The Times has a very clear editorial line that leans on the left side of the political spectrum. Without improperly editorializing, there’s usually a choice of language and rhetoric, as well as the placement of the article that acts like a telltale sign of the paper’s political affiliation. The new number of refugees accepted (30,000) is mentioned in contrast with the previous amount of refugees accepted in the country (45,000). There’s also mention of the 800,000 individuals already in the country that await to be granted refugee status as well. While government sources are quoted, there’s a sense of criticism that permeates the piece through the voice of Nazanin Ash, the vice president for policy and advocacy at the International Rescue Committee, as well as the comparison of refugees allowed during this administration and George W. Bush’s, especially after 9-11.
The second story is clearly a feature. It’s a story that could have been in yesterday’s issue, as well as it could have been published a month from now. Marc Benioff, the subject, is a San Francisco tech mogul who has recently acquired Time Magazine. It’s an important piece of news because the magazine is a well established New York-based institution that can influence public opinion. We find quotes from acquaintances, from Benioff itself and other subjects related to him or his business. Figures seem to be some of the most predominant hard facts that we can find throughout the story. “This week he stepped out onto a broader stage, purchasing Time magazine with his wife, Lynne, for $190 million”. This is a significant piece of information that sets the context for the article and the world it's describing. Later, we learn that “in early 2000 — right as Salesforce was starting up — the internet pioneer AOL bought Time Warner for $165 billion”. As said before, friends and other individuals relevant to the story are quoted, as well as Benioff himself, although his answers are somewhat short and vague. Facts, such as figures and dates, are the real “meat” of the story. Even though there’s some historical information about Benioff and the companies he worked for, there’s no real input from him in this piece that shapes an interesting profile.
Article 1: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/17/us/politics/trump-refugees-historic-cuts.html?action=click&module=Top%20Stories&pgtype=Homepage
Article 2: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/17/technology/time-marc-benioff.html?action=click&module=Top%20Stories&pgtype=Homepage
Comentarios
Publicar un comentario