In the Star Tribune's article, "Chaska rallies around family of teen killed by arrow," the author separates the article into three different categories. The first category is about Spencer Swanson's personal life. His achievements, cancer, and the mourning of this mother. In this part, the author has summarized the events of the boy's life very well. He uses quotes to illustrate how much Swanson will be missed to perhaps evoke emotions from the reader. The second category summarizes the shooting and the legal issues dealing with the shooting. It also includes if charges were brought upon the friend of Swanson.The last category summarizes how the community has reacted to the death and the overwhelming support that is spewing from them.
I do not think that this was very effective writing. It strays from the typical inverted pyramid style and, in fact, is more like an inverted hourglass. The most important information was in the middle of the article. It was not very effective. The beginning should have been at the bottom of the article. The beginning of the article was not appealing at all because those are emotions that are usually evoked from the family of the victim. The article would have been better if the events of the shooting were put first because that is what makes the story interesting. That is the unique point of the article.