3. As you were reading the articles, what specific things turned you off as a reader? And what did you appreciate about the coverage? Talk about quality of sources, writing style, focus of stories, etc.
The whole idea that the media focuses so much on an athletes personal life is what turns me off to begin with. Why are we so obsessed with what Woods does in his "private" life? Seriously, is that helping the world at all? I sometimes wonder. Let alone, stories like this are often hearsay and pretty similar to a gossip story. Some sources are good, but others are terrible. One article, and I can't remember which one it was, had Woods' agent responding via text message. While others used different news papers as sources, seems like we are getting a little lazy with finding sources. Or maybe that's what makes this event not so news worthy? Like I said earlier, the stories are focused on what the women said about the affairs and if Woods will return to golf. Woods has not spoken much about the affairs, with the exception of his aired apology and his admittance to going to rehab. Without being able to really get the true story from Woods, it kind of makes a story weak. Since he won't speak and a lot of people involved are untrustworthy (like a woman who may claim she had an affair with him, but has no real proof) or are anonymous it's difficult to find a source that is quality.
The deep infatuation that our society has on celebrities and professional athletes was a turn off. How many times can we tell the same story in a different way? I think it has been overplayed and almost made into this thing that we have floating around us everyday of our lives. I kind of just think enough is enough already.
The sources that were used in these articles seems as though that they didn't have much to work with at all. Only a couple of times throughout reading the articles, were multiple sources used. The majority of the articles read had a reader friendly writing style that was easy to navigate through and pick out the important information from.
What turned me off as a reader was that I am a positive person and all the articles were geared toward tearing him down. This is a fact that at the same time makes it newsworthy, society focuses on the scandals and terror and anything negative. I understand that a story about a celebrity having an affair is more interesting than one about butterflies migrating, but I always ask why can't there just be more happiness in the news. Though the coverage was mostly negative, I did appreciate the content of the stories. If new facts or details surfaced, they were always covered so that no one was left wondering what was going on.
The whole idea that the media focuses so much on an athletes personal life is what turns me off to begin with. Why are we so obsessed with what Woods does in his "private" life? Seriously, is that helping the world at all? I sometimes wonder. Let alone, stories like this are often hearsay and pretty similar to a gossip story. Some sources are good, but others are terrible. One article, and I can't remember which one it was, had Woods' agent responding via text message. While others used different news papers as sources, seems like we are getting a little lazy with finding sources. Or maybe that's what makes this event not so news worthy?
ReplyDeleteLike I said earlier, the stories are focused on what the women said about the affairs and if Woods will return to golf. Woods has not spoken much about the affairs, with the exception of his aired apology and his admittance to going to rehab. Without being able to really get the true story from Woods, it kind of makes a story weak. Since he won't speak and a lot of people involved are untrustworthy (like a woman who may claim she had an affair with him, but has no real proof) or are anonymous it's difficult to find a source that is quality.
The deep infatuation that our society has on celebrities and professional athletes was a turn off. How many times can we tell the same story in a different way? I think it has been overplayed and almost made into this thing that we have floating around us everyday of our lives. I kind of just think enough is enough already.
ReplyDeleteThe sources that were used in these articles seems as though that they didn't have much to work with at all. Only a couple of times throughout reading the articles, were multiple sources used. The majority of the articles read had a reader friendly writing style that was easy to navigate through and pick out the important information from.
What turned me off as a reader was that I am a positive person and all the articles were geared toward tearing him down. This is a fact that at the same time makes it newsworthy, society focuses on the scandals and terror and anything negative. I understand that a story about a celebrity having an affair is more interesting than one about butterflies migrating, but I always ask why can't there just be more happiness in the news.
ReplyDeleteThough the coverage was mostly negative, I did appreciate the content of the stories. If new facts or details surfaced, they were always covered so that no one was left wondering what was going on.