Hilary's Herald

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/01/us/politics/01biden.html?_r=1&ref=us&oref=slogin

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-0702010205feb01,1,2450042.story?coll=chi-news-hed

The New York Times article, “Biden Unwraps ’08 Bid With an Oops!,� discusses the controversy over Senator Joseph R. Biden’s remarks about Senator Barack Obama that many have deemed racist and offensive. The article also discusses previous blunders in Biden’s political career, Biden’s attempts to clarify his intentions by going on “The Daily Show� and apologizing to Obama and others, and the reactions of Obama and other African American politicians.
The writer of this article had many good quotes, including many partial quotes that were appropriate because they captured specific words that were colorful such as the partial quote, “blabbering bluster.� However, some of the statements were controversial, assumptions, or opinions and should have been attributed. For example, the statement that said Biden is, “known in Washington for his long-winded ways and his love of the microphone and the spotlight…�, and the statement that said he, “did something entirely out of character: He announced he was done talking,� may not be everyone’s opinion. Thus, the writer could have found someone to attribute these remarks.
An article from the Chicago Tribune called, “Biden tosses hat in ring, puts foot in mouth,� handled the challenge of attributing in a more appropriate manner because there were no controversial statements that went without attribution. This article also handled partial quotes well by placing quotes around unique phrases like, “lightning in a bottle.� Many of the same direct quotes were quoted in the same way in both articles, but I thought it was interesting that the quote when Biden quoted a saying of his mother’s was placed in single quotes in the Chicago Tribune article, and the New York Times writer used a colon to introduce the saying and did not put single quotes around the saying.
In my opinion, the Chicago Tribune article would have been more effective if it focused on the news of Biden’s controversial remark about Obama instead of delving too much into his policy on the Iraq war and the personal story about his wife and daughter dying in a car accident when he was 29. This story was obviously very sad, but it seemed out of place, and since the writer chose to end the article with this I almost forgot that the article was about Biden’s comment. I liked the New York Times article because it used descriptive words like “wounded� and “squak.� However, I did not know why the writer referred to the people in the story as “Mr.� instead of referring to the people by their last names like most articles do.