5. Critique the sources. Who had the best news coverage of the event? The worst? The most surprising? Write a paragraph or two discussing the various publications. You do not need to address them all
I thought that the BBC did a good job having a variety of sources in their stories as well as focusing on an actual story other then JUST the affair. BBC had quotes from Woods, Arnold Palmer and Gatorade. All the people were important parts of the news story. BBC also focused on background of Woods' career and why Palmer and Gatorade are important. Palmer was hosting a tournament that Woods said he won't be apart of, but Woods was grateful for Palmer's support. Gatorade dropped Woods after the discovery of his affairs, but still said they would donate to his charity, which make the company look better since they dropped Woods. But BBC goes on in the Sponsor loss article to discuss how Woods is one of the wealthiest athletes because of all his endorsements. Basically letting the reader decide Woods would be okay without a few endorsements, he still gets $40 million from Nike.
I thought the Orlando Sentinel did a decent job for a local paper. They discussed how the Woods news coverage was affecting the local community and disrupting every day life, not only for Woods but for all those who live in the community. I really liked that story because it gave insight to what is happening as well as commentary on the media and how it operates. The OS is also one of the papers who used a different newspaper as a source, which I thought kind of takes away from credibility of the story. What if that other news source is wrong? Or what if people would rather read that since they have the current information, unlike the local news?
Overall, I think it's a bit annoying that newspapers may only use one source, and since they don't say they tried to contact anyone else at the time of publishing, how can we really trust the stories?
After having read the articles and comparing each to one another side by side, it seems as though the one's that I had an easier time reading were not from this country at all. BBC did a great job covering the story and included information about the athlete including his background and his previous achievements. Put into sections where you could get a build up of what exactly happened in the man's life.
The worst of the news coverage is kind of a harsh way to put it. But that would fall under our very own Capital Journal. I would have liked to see more articles like those written by the BBC, thorough, where as you weren't asking questions about his life when you were done. The most surprising thing to me was that there were not more parodies, that I could see, floating around.
I also used the Orlando Sentinel and BBC for my stories. They were both very thorough and had a lot of information from many different sources. They showed views from all parties and I believe were also fair to all parties, they let each side defend themselves. I actually did not like the ABC News coverage of this issue because all I have been able to find are stories from each woman and news of new women.
I thought that the BBC did a good job having a variety of sources in their stories as well as focusing on an actual story other then JUST the affair. BBC had quotes from Woods, Arnold Palmer and Gatorade. All the people were important parts of the news story. BBC also focused on background of Woods' career and why Palmer and Gatorade are important. Palmer was hosting a tournament that Woods said he won't be apart of, but Woods was grateful for Palmer's support. Gatorade dropped Woods after the discovery of his affairs, but still said they would donate to his charity, which make the company look better since they dropped Woods. But BBC goes on in the Sponsor loss article to discuss how Woods is one of the wealthiest athletes because of all his endorsements. Basically letting the reader decide Woods would be okay without a few endorsements, he still gets $40 million from Nike.
ReplyDeleteI thought the Orlando Sentinel did a decent job for a local paper. They discussed how the Woods news coverage was affecting the local community and disrupting every day life, not only for Woods but for all those who live in the community. I really liked that story because it gave insight to what is happening as well as commentary on the media and how it operates. The OS is also one of the papers who used a different newspaper as a source, which I thought kind of takes away from credibility of the story. What if that other news source is wrong? Or what if people would rather read that since they have the current information, unlike the local news?
Overall, I think it's a bit annoying that newspapers may only use one source, and since they don't say they tried to contact anyone else at the time of publishing, how can we really trust the stories?
ReplyDeleteAfter having read the articles and comparing each to one another side by side, it seems as though the one's that I had an easier time reading were not from this country at all. BBC did a great job covering the story and included information about the athlete including his background and his previous achievements. Put into sections where you could get a build up of what exactly happened in the man's life.
ReplyDeleteThe worst of the news coverage is kind of a harsh way to put it. But that would fall under our very own Capital Journal. I would have liked to see more articles like those written by the BBC, thorough, where as you weren't asking questions about his life when you were done. The most surprising thing to me was that there were not more parodies, that I could see, floating around.
I also used the Orlando Sentinel and BBC for my stories. They were both very thorough and had a lot of information from many different sources. They showed views from all parties and I believe were also fair to all parties, they let each side defend themselves. I actually did not like the ABC News coverage of this issue because all I have been able to find are stories from each woman and news of new women.
ReplyDelete