A View on the News

Yahoo, Huffington Post and Slte have teamed up to host two presidential debates (2008) online... and online only. It will give voters a chance to ask their own questisons - actually participate in the debate. This seems to be an extension of the technological-themed race so far. Candidates are using the internet to their advantage, posting blogs, videos on YouTube and banner ads, creating MySpace pages and having "extremely well designed websites."

The first article I looked at is from caribjournal.com and can be found here: http://caribjournal.com/2007/04/23/online-presidential-debates-now-more-tech-savvy-new-minty-flavor/

This article is very colorful with lots of quotes paired with great information on the event. It has a little bit of a delayed lead, but we find out in the second paragraph that the information was released on Monday, showing timeliness. The impact is pretty evident, or at least the impact that the cadidates are trying to have:

**"...These debates represent a further merging of new media technology and politics, and are a great opportunity to bring more people into the political process, and engage the new generation of young voters who spend so much of their time – and get so much of their information – online.�**

The article has some sort of prominence, since the three companies (Yahoo, Huffington and Slate) are fairly well-known, which makes news. The article mentions other names such as Charlie Rose, who will host the event and Howard Dean, who will give the opening remarks for the Democratic debate. This gives the article even more prominence. This event definitely has novelty and the article really shows its unusualness:

**The world’s first online debates in human history have been planned for both democratic and republican candidates.**

Simply, it is a first and constitutes as human interest. Regarding the supplemental values, it is definitely helpful. The article gives a lot of information on the debates including why they are doing them online, what it is going to be like, etc. so that readers can decide whether they would like to tune in.

The second article I read is from MSNBC.com and can be found here: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18271517/

This article contains many of the same news values as the first. It is timely because the presidential race is just starting to take off, however the article does not include the date that the info was released. For all we know, it could've been a week ago. The impact isn't as reiterated as in the first article, however it does mention the following, the impact on the public:

**Voters will be invited to submit questions, and can blog in real time to share their opinions on the candidates' answers.**

This article has prominence and novelty for the same reasons as the first article and is helpful as well. This is something that impacts everyone; therefore, it could be considered a necessity in both articles because both stress the turn from everything being televised to everything online.

I think both of these articles are well done, however the first one was more fun to read, in my opinion. The lead put you into context - I think that is what grabbed me right away and that is why i prefer that one over the second. It's not boring. There are some quotes in it that are way too long, however... a lot of them could be paraphrased. The second reporter did a better job with that.

Posted by Allison Hall at 4:12 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

On Monday, a gunman shot and killed 32 people at Virginia Tech and then proceeded to kill himself, making it the deadliest shooting rampage in U.S. history. He first went to a dorm at the university where he shot and killed a man and woman. He then went to a engineering buildling where he killed 30 more people. The university and police are under pressure to explain why the did not notify the studentbody and the faculty sooner after the first shooting. Today (Tuesday) the president of the university, Charles Stege, released the information that the gunman was a student.

The first article I read is from MSNBC.com and can be found here: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18151625/

This article concentrates on the new information about the guman - the fact that he was a student at the university; therefore, it serves as more of a follow-up article. For the most part, it assumes that the reader knows about the shootings. Due to the fact that it is more of a follow-up article, it is shorter in length; however, it goes contain many news values. It is obviously timely, since this event just happened yesterday. Because it is an online article, the reporters are able to update it more than if they were only able to publish it in paper form or on television. The article definitely shows impact. It shows the impact it has on the police and university:

**...the police and university authorities came under pressure to explain how a gunman apparently evaded detection after killing two people and then went on to kill 30 others in America's worst shooting incident.**

The article shows the impact the students felt in result of this issue:

**Many students expressed anger that they were not warned of any danger until more than two hours after the first attack at a dormitory, and then only in an e-mail from the university.**

It is surprising that there are no interviews with students in this article, but since it is a follow-up, it concentrates on the new facts that are being brought to the table - not the enormous emotional impact this event has on the students involved. Everybody knows how they feel.. now what exactly happened and what is going to happen? This article shows the conflict of the event itself as well as the controversy over the action or lack of action that was taken by officals. Through the phrase above and the following two, the reporter shows the students and the officials side to the issue:

**Mr Steger said the authorities thought the initial shooting at around 7.15am, which took place in the West Ambler Johnston dormitory, was a "domestic fight, maybe a murder-suicide", adding: "We thought it was confined to that dormitory."**

**We knew that there was a shooting but we thought it was confined to a particular setting," Mr Steger had told a press conference late on Monday night, explaining the lack of more urgent measures such as evacuating the sprawling grounds or shutting down the whole campus, which has more than 25,000 students.**

The event is pretty clearly a novelty, since this does not happen everyday and because it is "America's worst shooting incident," as the article says. Regarding the supplemental values, the event does have currency, for it is a subject worthy of discussion and school shootings have happened all over the country over the last 10 years. The fact that the article is concentrated on the fact that the gunman was identified as a student at Virginia Tech is news that is very important; it must be disclosed. This gives the article necessity. It is necessary for the country to know about this incident as a whole because we can possibly learn from their mistakes and the things they did right in such a horrible situation.

The second article I read is from CBS.com and can be found here: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/04/17/ap/national/main2692957.shtml

This article goes way more in depth with the incident than the last one did. Although they have a similar headline, "Gunman was a student," this second article recaps the entire incident up to what they know now. Therefore, it is must longer. The article shows timeliness, since it just happened yesterday and the new information indicating that the gunman was a student was released today. The impact is definitely shown in this article through quotes. Just a few include:

**"For Ryan and Emily and for those whose names we do not know," one woman pleaded in a church service Monday night.

Another mourner added: "For parents near and far who wonder at a time like this, 'Is my child safe?'"

His friend Gregory Walton, a 25-year-old who graduated last year, said he feared the nightmare had just begun.

"I knew when the number was so large that I would know at least one person on that list," said Walton, a banquet manager. "I don't want to look at that list. I don't want to.

"It's just, it's going to be horrible, and it's going to get worse before it gets better."**

This article shows prominence in a small way, but it is definitely there. It mentions President Bush coming to the memorial service Tuesday:

**President Bush planned to attend a memorial service Tuesday afternoon at the university...**

Although it merely mentions it, it is in the third paragraph of the article, which indicates the importance of it: names make news. This article also shows conflict in the same way the first one does. It gives the two sides of the story regarding the action officials took and did not take during the time of crisis:

**Steger said the university was trying to notify students who were already on-campus. "We warned the students that we thought were immediately impacted," he told CNN. "We felt that confining them to the classroom was how to keep them safest."

"I think the university has blood on their hands because of their lack of action after the first incident," said Billy Bason, 18, who lives on the seventh floor of the dorm.**

The article shows novelty for the same reason as the first: it was unexpected and not a part of everyday life. It also was called the "deadliest shooting rampage in modern U.S. history." Concerning the supplemental news values, the article shows currency by talking about other campus shootings and massacres in U.S. history, indicating trends and a subject that IS worthy of discussion. The information in this article is necessary for readers to know because it is breaking news, national news. Like the other article, other universities can learn from Virginia Tech's mistakes and from the things they did right in this kind of situation to better security.

The second article was a little too long, in my opinion. Although it is much more thorough than the first, it seems like the reporter wanted to put everything he/she could into the article; it includes the newest information, a synopsis on the event, a few of the deaths and a mini-obituary on those whose names were released, history on past shootings... I don't think that the reporter did a very good job of selecting what information to concentrate on in the article. The first article, however was really short and to the point. Although it doesn't give any quotes that show the emotional impact on the students, that is not what the article is about. It seems like the reporter made a conscious decision to write about this new info and insert some other facts in there, as well. I think this reporter did a good job of including the information about the event itself into the article without making a big deal of it. For example:

**Mr Steger said the authorities thought the initial shooting at around 7.15am, which took place in the West Ambler Johnston dormitory, was a "domestic fight, maybe a murder-suicide", adding: "We thought it was confined to that dormitory."**

This tells what Steger said, however includes the time and place of the event in case a reader did not read about that before this article. Overall, I think that the second article is easier to read and follow what is going on.

Posted by Allison Hall at 2:01 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

The NBC reality tv series, "Grease: You're the One that I Want," ended Sunday night with the audience voting for Laura Osnes (from Eagan, Minn.!) and Max Crumm to play Sandy and Danny. They will be taking on these roles in the new Broadway show, "Grease," out this summer.

The first article I looked at is from Forbes.com. Because it's a national news source, it has a national perspective when it comes to news values. It definitely shows that the event is timely, stating that the show just ended on Sunday after nearly 3 months. It shows a bit of impact nationally; actually, the audience is who impacted the decision:

**The winners, chosen by audience votes, were announced Sunday during the final episode of the NBC reality series "Grease: You're the One That I Want."**

The audience voted, therefore they had an impact and this article shows that. It also discusses 'Grease' as a musical and a movie, giving some facts about its success in the past. This shows the impact the musical has had on our culture.:

**The upcoming revival of "Grease" will be its third Broadway production. The original, which opened in 1972, played for more than 3,000 performances. The second, featuring Rosie O'Donnell as Betty Rizzo, arrived some two decades later, for a run of more than 1,500 performances.
The 1978 film, starring John Travolta and Olivia Newton-John, was one of the most successful movie musicals of all time.**

The event has some sort of prominence, for these people that won will be names that make news. Although they may not be considered "famous," the reality TV show is/was, therefore it's prominent. For those who live in the areas where the winners are originally from, this event may have proximity; however, for the most part, it doesn't show it. The article also shows some novelty, since the show announced the winners for the first time Sunday. Regarding the supplemental values, the article shows currency (for the same reasons as timeliness) and entertainment value.

This article can be found here: http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2007/03/26/ap3551309.html

The second article I looked at had a different perspective because it is from a Twin Cities news source, twincities.com. The new Sandy, Laura Osnes, is a Minnesota native, coming from Eagan. This article concentrates on her for the most part; because it is so specific and a narrowed subject, it contains many news values. It is timely for the same reason as the first article - it clarifies that it the winners were announced on Sunday evening. This article shows a local impact since Osnes is from Minnesota; it discusses her wedding, and also quotes some individuals who have directed her in the past in various musicals:

**Osnes' Minnesota mentors weren't surprised by Sunday's verdict.
"There was no doubt in my mind that Laura would win any competition anywhere for the role of Sandy in 'Grease,' " said Michael Brindisi, artistic director of Chanhassen Dinner Theatres, where Osnes was playing Sandy even as she auditioned for the reality TV show.
"She's got all of the skills necessary for that role and many other roles. She's gorgeous, she's sexy, she's sweet, she's innocent. She's also a really good 21-year-old actress."**

**"She's not trying to make it fit," said Matthew Howe, who directed a teenage Osnes as Dorothy in a Children's Theatre Company production of "The Wizard of Oz." "She's just being Laura."**

These add local impact, but also give the reader a view of her personality through the eyes of some of the people she has worked with. It also shows that people were supporting her. The article shows prominence, as well - with the NBC reality TV show being the famous "institution." People may feel a geographic closeness - proximity - if they are from the twin cities area, which most of the readers will be, because Osnes is from Eagan. The article shows a little bit of conflict with just one quote from Osnes:

**"After the show last week, I tried to give Ashley a hug, and she sort of pushed me away," she said. "It can be hard to keep a positive attitude when there's a whole lot of emotions."**

Ashley Spencer, the "Sandy" that Osnes beat is who she is referring to in this quote. It shows a personal/internal conflict that Spencer may have. The event is somewhat unusual, for the same reasons as the last article showed. Regarding the supplemental values, the article shows currency and entertainment.

In my opinion, the second article was a lot more interesting to read. This is probably due to the fact that I am from the Twin Cities, therefore I enjoy reading about the life of someone who is from the same area I am. It served as more of a human interest story than anything, while the first one seemed to be more of a report on what happened. I feel the twincities.com article really allowed the reader to get to know this girl and a little bit of her personality.

Posted by Allison Hall at 4:12 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

A new study conducted by University of Minnesota and St. Louis University doctors that brought them to teh conclusion that duct tape does not get rid of warts. During the study, they used a control group that used moleskin on individuals' warts. The second group used a moleskin pad, as well, but put a underlayer of clear duct tape. It turns out that 3/4 of the duct-taped warts that had disappeared came back within six months. In the control group, 1/3 returned. However, the researchers mistakenly thought that clear and gray duct tape had the same adhesive, when it turns out they don't (Gray tape's is rubber based while clear's is acrylic).

The first article I read is from the Toronto Star and was written on March 20. The story has many news values associated with it that the reporter shows through the article. First off, this event is certainly timely, seeing as the study was just released. It definitely has an impact - warts are common - but this article doesn't exactly show the imapct. However, it does say this:

**A study by University of Minnesota and St. Louis University doctors says that, despite claims to the contrary, duct tape does not vanquish the common wart.**

This shows that the popular belief was the contrary, which shows some impact and mostly conflict because of the two different opinions. Also because the researchers used clear tape instead of gray, that created conflict as well; perhaps the study wasn't done right..? Regarding the supplemental trends, this story definitely is helpful - it is consumer/health related; therefore, people (especially those with warts) can learn from it and apply it in their own lives. This article even touches on what the researchers think the public will do with this info:

**"I don't think that those of us who have used duct tape in the past few years will stop using it because of this (study)," said Dr. Neil Shear, head of dermatology at Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre in Toronto. "I think we will say ... `We have no idea if this works or not, or how it works, but it has been reported to help some people. It's not a big expense. It doesn't hurt a lot. What's the harm in trying?' "**

This shows how it relates to the public, but also the credibility of the research itself. The individuals conducting the research don't sound extremely confident in it - they aren't convinced that people will take this seriously because they may have made a few mistakes (with the different types of tape). I wouldn't consider this story to be necessary; however, it does show at least some importance. For those who have warts, it is extremely important to know what the options are, how to remove them and what works.

This article can be found here: http://www.thestar.com/News/article/193780

The second article is from the Star Tribune. This article seems to go into more detail; therefore, it has more new values incorporated into it. The article shows that the topic is recent by clairifying that the study was "a study in March's Archives of Dermatology." The topic definitely has an impact, because so many people have warts; however, the article doesn't show that very clearly. There is a quote from a doctor, talking about patients:

**"I have plenty of patients come in having tried duct tape. That's why they come in, because it didn't work," Paller said.**

This shows that there are definitely an abundance of people out there, according to this doctor, that have this problem. This quote also shows someone else, other than the researchers supporting the study's findings. Although the article also mentions the grey/clear tape debate, this quote gives the article balance and fairness. The article shows conflict, due to this debate, as well:

**This time, a study among adults found duct tape helped only 21 percent of the time and was no more better than moleskin, a cotton-tape bandage. But researchers used transparent duct tape so patients and doctors would not be able to guess which bandages contained duct tape. Only later did they learn that the transparent variety does not contain rubber, unlike the gray duct tape that appeared to be effective in the 2002 study.**

The article shows necessity in the same way, or at least some importance. Helpfulness is big in this article too, for it is health related and even gives some advice on what else works for removing warts:

**What works: Over-the-counter topical treatments containing salicylic acid sometimes work. Doctors use laser therapy or liquid nitrogen against an unyielding wart, or in extreme cases a prescription cream or a virus-fighting injection. Warts usually clear up on their own in about two years, Paller said.**

This article can be found here: http://www.startribune.com/484/story/1066089.html

I think the second article does a better job of explaining warts in a simple way so the reader will understand without being a specialist in science and/or medicine. I also think that the story was way more balanced than the first. It was ironic, how both articles are about this new find, however the researchers themselves don't seem extremely confident in their findings. I'm not sure if that is the reporters' fault for not writing balanced articles or the researchers' fault for speaking up and standing up for their research. Seeing as both articles contain quotes from the researhcers that aren't especially optimistic about their findings, I would guess that it was them who don't believe in their research - not the reporters.

Posted by Allison Hall at 2:19 PM | Permalink | Comments (3) | TrackBacks (0)

Tuesday night, Brandon Rogers was the first of 12 finalists to be kicked off American Idol after he forgot the words to the song he sang, "You Can't Hurry Love." It was a Diana Ross-themed show; contestants sang everything from "Ain't No Mountain High Enough" to "Stop in the Name of Love." Ross even made an appearance, singing two songs on the show.

The article I looked at is from Newsday.com and was written on March 15. It has some news values but does not even come close to covering them all. It shows that it is timely, since this episode aired this week. It has prominence, since it is a hit TV show, with celebrity judges and a celebrity host (Ryan Seacrest). Also, it mentions the Diana Ross-themed show and the fact that Ross herself performed. This shows prominence, as well. This event definitely has novelty, since contestants don't usually forget the words to the songs they are singing on American Idol. It also is an unusual event because...

**"Last night, Rogers became the first of the top 12 finalists to be told to stop in the name of love of music, but before he could even reprise his song, the show ended."**

Regarding the four supplemental news values, this article shows that the event has currency and entertainment. Clearly, it is current news for the same reason as it is timely. Most of all, this article is for entertainment purposes because it is about a subject that is a part of the entertainment industry. One could argue that it this event has necessity, for those who watch the show insist on knowing the latest, or if fans of the show missed the episode, they will want to know what happened. However, the article doesn't show this necessity; it may imply it, though.

This article can be found here: http://www.newsday.com/entertainment/tv/ny-etidol155131154mar15,0,4794551.story?coll=ny-television-print

The second article I looked at is on CNN.com. This article shows more news values than the previous one. It shows the timeliness in the same way the first article did - confirming it was this week's episode of American Idol. This article shows that the event has prominence because of the show's popularity:

**"'American Idol' continues to rule the ratings, attracting between 27 million and 37 million viewers per telecast this season."**

The article also shows this by mentioning that the show is a "top-rated Fox network sing-off." This identifies the show's importance.

This article shows prominence, as well, with the mention of the judges as well as Diana Ross. It also shows some conflict, for the lead reads:

**"Brandon Rogers, who forgot the words to his song on Tuesday's "American Idol," had a feeling he wouldn't last. He got confirmation Wednesday."**

This mentions Rogers' feelings, and his reaction to the event. It's more the drama that makes the article have conflict, as well as the quote from Rogers, which the first article containted as well:

**"I have no hard feelings," Rogers, 28, said before leaving the stage. "I kind of expected it."

The article shows that the event has novelty, for the same reasons as the first article does. This article also shows currency and that the event has entertainment value, in the same way as the first article does.

This article can be found here: http://www.cnn.com/2007/SHOWBIZ/TV/03/15/tv.americanidol.ap/

I think these articles are mainly for entertainment purposes. The stories may be for those who watch the show but missed the episode, or for those who don't have time to really watch it but like to keep up with the latest entertainment buzz. The second article does a great job of including news values and keeping it simple. Making sure that the reader knows the importance, culturally, of the TV show is huge - giving the event more impact. For example, just adding the fact that American Idol "continues to rule the ratings" and is "top-rated." Those phrases say a lot. I don't think the first article did a very good job of that.

Posted by Allison Hall at 9:20 PM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

President Bush visited the southern region of the country where a major storm and tornadoes destroyed many areas and took lives, as well. He spend time in Enterprise, Ala. at the high school that was destroyed and killed 8 students and Americus, to a neighborhood where 2 people had died during the storm. President Bush promises federal aid to victims and for rebuilding.

The first article I looked at is from the San Francisco Chornicle, but originally in the New York Times. It's headline reads, "After deadly tornadoes, Bush vistits ruined areas." The event is important and has value not only because the storm hit very recently, but whenever the President visits a "ruined" area, it makes news. Therefore, it is timely and has prominence. The event also has an impact on the whole country, for whenever there is a disaster like this we are affected in some way. This article shows conflict, as well. What to do and how to clean up is always a question that needs answering after a storm that results in such disaster, both emotionally and physically. The article mentions the Bush Adminstration's reaction, or lack there of, to Hurricane Katrina and contrasts it to his reaction in this sircumstance:

**The hastily arranged trip, after a massive storm system that produced at least 31 tornadoes from Minnesota to the Gulf of Mexico, was designed to send an image of a compassionate president leading a competent government response, in sharp contrast with the lingering images of federal indifference and ineptitude in the wake of Hurricane Katrina.**

This shows some conflict as well. This article definitely shows the novelty, or unusualness of the event:

**The hastily arranged trip, after a massive storm system that produced at least 31 tornadoes from Minnesota to the Gulf of Mexico...**

It's not every day..or every year there are that many tornadoes resulting from one big storm. This has currency, too, for it is a subject worthy of discussion. People died. People were injured. People lost their homes, their schools. Therefore, it is also necessary for people to know about.

This article can be found here: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2007/03/04/MNGM4OF4JJ1.DTL

The second article I looked at is from the Boston Globe and titled, "Bush visits Ala. school hit by tornado. This article is longer and goes into more detail about what he did, what he said and what he wants to have happen. Regarding news values, this article shows much of the same values as the other article has. It's timely, has prominence, is unusual and is necessary to know about for all the same reasons as the first article. This article from the Boston Globe seems to identify these news values within the article more clearly, making it have more of an impact on those who do not live in the south. For example, the article quotes Bush saying the following:

**"The best help they can get is when a citizen comes and builds them a house," the president said, appealing for volunteers to help in the recovery. "The minute you find out you don't have what you need, if you put out a call to the country, this country will respond."

This shows the impact that it can have on the entire country, like Hurricane Katrina did. It also shows the impact that the President had on the people he visited:

**The president stopped by the home where the two had died; the tornado tore the back of the house away, leaving rooms exposed.

When she saw Bush, Benita Fletcher called her boyfriend and then handed her phone to the president. "President Bush calling," Bush said. "Looks like you have a fine girlfriend."**

The article also shows conflict, obviously, but also how it is being resolved:

**Teams from the federal relief agency have nearly completed preliminary damage assessments in Alabama and began similar work in Georgia yesterday, which Paulison said shows the extent of the changes at FEMA. He said the agency started moving in truckloads of supplies and communications equipment immediately, and had teams on the ground just a few hours after the storms hit.**

This article seems to go more in depth in general and gives the reader a picture of exactly what the President did on this visit, how people reacted and how he reacted as well.

This article can be found here: http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2007/03/04/bush_visits_ala_school_hit_by_tornado/

I prefer the Boston Globe article over the San Francisco Chronicle article, solely because it goes into more detail. I feel this event should be covered in the fashion of the Boston Globe article - detailed, including the emotions of everyone involved and the actions the government is intending to take. The first article does have quotes from survivors from the high school in Ala., which adds an emotional effect. Also, I think these articles shed Bush in a better light, after all the critisism he ha received recently regarding Katrina.

Posted by Allison Hall at 3:03 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

Ellen DeGeneres is booked to host the 2007 Oscards, airing live on Sunday night. She apparently has "had her eye on" hosting the Oscars for sometime now, especially after hosting the Emmys and the Grammys already. Producers of the show as well as academy members are very confident in DeGeneres and believe that she will be a great host, bringing a good atmosphere to the awards show. The talk show host has been taping two episodes of her show a day in order to prepare for the big night and have the week of the Oscars off.

The article I looked at, from the Cincinnati Post, has many news values. Obviously, the event is timely because the Oscars air Sunday night (tonight). The event may has an impact nationally, since the Oscars bring in so many viewers:

**All that's left are a few final touches and hosting a live, global telecast that in the United States alone generally attracts an audience of at least 40 million.

The event of DeGeneres hosting has prominence because she is a talk show host/comedian that is nationally, if not internationally known. Her name will make news. Although there isn't external conflict shown in the article, it does show some internal conflict for DeGeneres with her nerves of hosting, etc. The Oscars aren't exactly unusual because they take place every year, but it is DeGeneres' first time hosting, therefore it is a "first of their kind," which makes the event a novelty. The article is clearly current and worthy of discussion and it's entertaining. The audience gets to see another view of the awards ceramony, the host's preparation. Usually we hear all about the nominees and the celebrities that will be there.

This article can be found here: http://news.cincypost.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070223/LIFE/702230342/1005

The second article is from ABC News. Naturally, it has a lot of the same news values since it discusses the same event. It is timely, national impact, prominence, internal conflict for DeGeneres, some novelty, currency and it is entertaining. The one thing different about this article is the mention of Katrina and DeGeneres' involvement in the disaster:

**"I'm determined like you are," DeGeneres told Roberts. "It's Mississippi and New Orleans. & They need our help. They just need, if nothing else, to know that we don't -- we're not forgetting. So it's always, always in my heart to mention them."

It's DeGeneres' goal, she says, to bring joy. Through her show, to the victims of Katrina, and, hopefully, on Sunday night at the Oscars.

"I want to walk out and make everybody feel real good that night." **

The first article didn't say anything about this subject, which makes the article have more of a national impact than ever. I found it interesting that this information came at the end of the article. It isn't the main theme in the article; however its importance was lower than what DeGeneres would be wearing to the awards show.

This article can be found here: http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/story?section=entertainment&id=5065301

Personally, I prefer the first article. I feel that it really concentrates on the theme of the article, while the second article jumps around a lot. I feel that is really conentrates on DeGeneres' preparation for the awards show, which is interesting for readers; we get a "behind the scenes" look, in a way. I also like the quotes that are used toward the end from the producers of the Oscars and members of the academy. It gives me a better idea of what to expect from the show and gives me confidence in DeGeneres to do a good job.

Posted by Allison Hall at 2:33 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

The article on this topic that I chose is from CNN.com and titled, "Police: Students posted fake snow-day notice on school's Web site." On Monday, two girls who attend Edgewood High School in Trenton, Ohio went onto the school's website and posted an announcement that there would be a snow-day and school was cancelled. This apparently persuaded some parents and students; there were many students who stayed home.

This news story shows that the event has value to the readers on many levels. This article is certainly timely - it took place just yesterday, therefore it is news worthy and people want to hear about it. It's breaking news. The article reassures the readers that the event definitely had an impact on it's community. There were individuals who were persuaded by the posting and students ended up staying home from school that day... that's a definite impact:

**The notice, posted Monday, confused many parents -- snow was not in the forecast -- and persuaded some students to stay home.** (a quote from the article)

As far as novelty goes, this event wasn't a part of everyday life - it was somewhat unexpected. It is a human interest story. The value of currency is prominent because the subject becomes worthy of discussion. The article discusses how the girls got into the online system in the first place:

**The company that runs the Web site, RCH Networks Inc., said the system was not hacked into because no security breach was detected. Administrators say the girls must have somehow gotten the password.**

Perhaps we need to be careful of people's access to Web sites and the use of passwords. To a certain extent, this article is kind of amusing. The fact that those girls were able to do what they did and actually make people believe what they said was somewhat entertaining.

This article can be found at: http://www.cnn.com/2007/EDUCATION/02/11/fake.snow.day.ap/

The second article I looked at is from MSNBC.com and titled, "Students allegedly post fake snow day." This article shows a lot of the same values for the event as the first one does in many of the same ways. It is timely, it clearly has an impact and it is something unexpected (not a part of everyday life). Currency is shown to be important, because the article discusses whether the Web site was broken into or if the girls just knew the password. RCH Networks Inc., who runs the Web site is quoted:

**"The Web site wasn't hacked. It was accessed," RCH President Craig Hesson said.**

Last but not least, the article proves to be somewhat entertaining because of the situation. The article, however, makes is a more serious issue, stating in the lead:

**TRENTON, Ohio - Two teenage girls are accused of gaining unauthorized access to their school district's Web site and posting a fake winter school closing, police said.**

Because the article starts off in this way, stating the allegations and the fact that the girls are being charged. Another quote, later in the article states this:

**One of the girls, 16, was charged in Butler County Juvenile Court with delinquency by unauthorized use of a computer and by reason of records tampering. The other girl, 17, was charged with delinquency by reason of complicity to those crimes, Sheriff's Sgt. Monte Mayer said. Their names were not released.**

The other article contains a quote similar to this one; however, because the second article begins by stating in its lead that this is a legal issue, the article immediately becomes more serious.

This article can be found here: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17116711/

After examining these two articles and learning about this event, I feel that this event has a lot of value mostly because of the unusualness. It made national news, so for us in Minnesota, the event doesn't really have any proximity value. However, the event does have proximity value for those who live in Trenton, Ohio. I think that there is a possibility of discussion about the internet, the use of passwords and students gaining access to Web sites they they shouldn't be. Although RCH Networks Inc. claims the "system was not hacked into because no security breach was detected" and administration of the school says "the girls must have somehow gotten the password," there seems to be something fishy there.

Posted by Allison Hall at 3:42 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The article I chose is from newsday.com and is titled "Grammys 2007: Making nice to Dixie Chicks." The article discusses the country singing group's album "Taking the Long Way." The album is very controversial and "politically charged," as the article puts it. The Dixie Chicks won album of the year, country album of the year, song of the year, best country group vocal performance and record of the year. This came as a surprise to the singing group and others, as well, since their album was not played on a lot of country radio stations after lead singer Natalie Maines outwardly stated her opposition to the war in Iraq and President Bush.

This article is definitely written in an inverted pyramid style. It starts out with a summary lead, which wraps up the main news event:

**The Dixie Chicks cleaned up last night at the 49th annual Grammy Awards, sweeping the top three categories and taking home five awards for music from their controversial, politically charged "Taking the Long Way" album.**

The article then goes into supporting information, giving the information on the awards the singing group won and a quote from one of the group memebers about the win in general:

**I'm ready to make nice," said Maines, after the sweep was complete. "I think people are using their freedom of speech here tonight with all of these awards. I think people were using their voice the same way this loudmouth did."**

Then, of course there is a lot of backround information about the Chicks at the Grammys, giving some more quotations from before the awards and a quote from one of their acceptance speaches. The rest of the article is a whole secondary theme, giving an overview of the entire awards show Sunday night. It mentions the big winners, a few quotes from them, such as Mary J. Blige. The article ends with "Highs and Lows" of the night, which could potentially be cut off if it was to be put in an actual newspaper and space was limited. However, because this article seems to be only read online, the reporter probably added that to spice it up and give the reader a better feeling of the show, for those who didn't watch it.

This article can be found at: http://www.newsday.com/entertainment/music/ny-etgrammy125091067feb12,0,448493.story?coll=ny-music-print

The second article on this subject is from the Kansas City Star and is titled "Nice Chicks finish first." This article's first two paragraphs function as the "summary lead," explaining the most relavent news:

**Nearly four years after a flippant comment about their president nearly derailed their careers, the Dixie Chicks are feeling some salvation.
The country trio won five Grammys at the 49th annual award show Sunday night in Los Angeles, including album of the year, song of the year, record of the year and best country album. And the Chicks were feeling redeemed.**

Naturally, the article then gives details about the news event, such as a quote from the group's lead singer Natalie Maines. The article also goes into other artists' wins at the awards who seemed to have redeemed themselves, such as Ludacris. The article mentions former Vice President Al Gore showing up. The article seems to suggest that the show had a underlying political theme. The article seems to take a turn here, talking about the transition the grammy's are going through:

**Like the recording industry it represents, the Grammy Awards show is navigating an unpredictable transition: from the longtime and loyal fans who represent the industry’s lucrative past to the younger, finicky fans who are its uncertain future.**

From there, the article talks about the performances of the night and how the show was geared toward younger audience but the oldies were definitely not absent with a tribute performance for the Eagles, the "In Memoriam" segment and the commercials' appeal to the "boomer generation." These things are definitely a second theme. The reporter definitely could have written an article with these ideas as their main theme, but because the Dixie Chicks were a winner of 5 awards, that is what took priority.

This second article can be found at: http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/living/16678724.htm

In my opinion, I think both articles were informational, but took different routes. The second article focused more on the performances than the first article, which are always big highlights at the Grammys, whether they are good or bad performances. The first article goes into fashion a little bit with its "High and Lows" commentary at the end. Both articles have good and bad things about them, but they seemed to follow the inverted pyramid style pretty closely, putting the most important, news-worthy information at the beginning and the things of less importance at the end.

Posted by Allison Hall at 1:44 PM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

The article titled "Senate studies Katrina rebuilding" was printed by USA Today and written by a reporter from the Associated Press. As its headline suggests, the article discusses the rebuildling of New Orleans and a Senate Committee hearing held on Monday. The city's mayor, Ray Nagin, stated that he does not feel there is much effort being put into repairing the "hurricane-battered city" in comparison to what is being spent on Iraq. This hearing took place almost a week after President Bush's State of the Union Address in which he failed to comment on the damage that still has not been taken care of down south. This aspect is something the article focuses on, as well.

The author, like any other reporter, had the challenge of inserting quotations and attributing sources. Obviously, Mayor Ray Nagin was quoted throughout the article, stating his opinion and view on the subject. The reporter definitely allowed the quotes to explain what was said at the hearing, instead of explaining it in his own words. For example, in the very beginning of the article, Nagin is quoted saying, "I think it's more class than anything, but there’s racial issues associated with it also." This quotation sums up a lot of what Nagin is arguing and, although the article did not discuss this specific aspect of the topic in any further detail, the reporter obviously thought it was important and that the quote speaks for itself. Other individuals were quoted in the article, all of which were done well. There doesn’t seem to be many redundancies, if any, when it comes to the quotations and what is being reported in the reporter’s words. One quotation toward the end of the article stood out from the rest. The reporter notes that a man “interrupted committee chairman Senator Joseph Lieberman as he opened the hearing. The man yelled, ‘Stand up for justice! We want somebody to stand up for justice!’� The article goes on to describe Lieberman’s reaction by quoting what he said after this man was escorted out of the hearing room. Although this is a miniscule detail, it helps bring the audience into the story; it makes the reader feel like he or she was there during the hearing. Also, that incident is something that doesn’t normally happen, which makes the article itself stand out from the rest.

This article can be found at:

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2007-01-29-senate-katrina_x.htm

An article on the same topic was printed in the Seattle Times and was written by Michael Kunzelman from the Associated Press. The reporter for this article, titled “New Orleans mayor criticizes pace of recovery� also had the challenge of picking and choosing quotations to use in telling the story. Although there are a few quotations that are used in both articles, for the most part the quotes used in this one are fairly different from the previous. The quotes in this article are way more in-depth on the subject; therefore, the feelings and opinions of the individuals involved really come out. Take this quote for example:

"And then I look at what we're doing in Iraq and how we spend money at an unprecedented level there, how we can set up temporary hospitals and designate money to rebuild their economy, and we have this dance going on in New Orleans," he said.

The first article does not go into great detail about this aspect of the issue. It is actually paraphrased in its lead (not a quote) but is never brought up again:

“Mayor Ray Nagin told a Senate committee Monday he doesn't see the will to fix his hurricane-battered city when compared with the billions spent on the war in Iraq.�

One can see that in this article, it is a fact. In the second article the reporter is quoting someone saying it, which is a fact itself but it give the individual a personality because of the wording of the direct quotation. This is the article’s way of keeping the attention of the audience – making them feel like they kind of know these people who are speaking.

This second article can be found at:

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2003547140_nagin30.html

I think these two articles are different because of the diverse choice of quotations. The USA Today article seems to be more facts based and concentrates on what happened and who said what in a very straight forward manner. This is good, in my opinion, because ultimately that is the job of a reporter – to report the news. The Seattle Times story, on the other hand, is more in depth and gives character to the quoted individuals due to the detailed quotations. This article may be more exciting to read; however I don’t believe that it is a newspaper reporter’s job to give someone character or make sure the audience knows what kind of a person he or she is. It can be, in a way, biased; giving a bunch of colorful quotations by certain people and not by others. So, I think the first article is more news-oriented and credible.

Posted by Allison Hall at 3:32 AM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

The New York Times article titled, "Bush Iraq Plan Is Condemned by State Panel" discusses the President's State of the Union Address Wednesday night and the Senate Foreign Relations Committee denoucing of President Bush's intent to increase the amount of troops in Iraq. Different proposals regarding this issue have been made by democratic senators, as well. The theme that seems to run throughout the article is the persuasion on both sides (Bush plan supporters and non-Bush plan supporters). The democrat senators are trying their hardest to get the support of other democrats as well as republicans, at which they have succeeded. The article basically concludes that the President has made his decision and although he may not have financial support going into this, he will not back down.

The lead for this article is fairly simple and straight forward, answering the who, what and when of the topic. However, starting the article with "One day after President Bush implored Congress to give his Iraq strategy a chance to succeed..." kind of delays the point of the story. The last part, "setting up thte most direct confrontation over the war since it began nearly four years ago" could definitely grab the attention of the audience. The article contains the latest news related to the President's State of the Union Address Wednesday night; therefore, it is something people want to hear about and probably is new to them.
Here is the link to the this article: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/25/washington/25capital.html?ref=world

The second article I looked at is from the Los Angeles Times, the headline reading "Senate committee approves resolution against troop surge". This article's lead highlights the fact that the resolution that the senate came to was "toughly worded", something that the other article from the New York Times mentioned but later in the story. Unlike tthe other, this lead gets right to the point, immediately saying, "A Senate committee approved a toughly worded resolution Wednesday to oppose a troop buildup in Iraq..."
You can find the article here: http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-warvote25jan25,1,1727261.story?coll=la-headlines-nation&track=crosspromo

In my opinion, the lead for the first article is a little wordy, but it is still easy to understand. I believe the first part of it is in the passive tense; the point of the article is delayed. The action is coming after, when that should be the first thing the reader sees. The last part of it is a great attention grabber: "...setting up the most direct confrontation over the war since it began nearly four years ago." That would actually be a good way to begin the article. It could indicate a possible bias; the reader may ask, 'According to who? You?' BUT it would definitely grab the audience's attention.

I think the second article's lead is really easy to understand and is a clear, straightforward introduction to the rest of the story. This is in part because of the active voice coming out right at the beginning of the article. It says exactly WHAT happened right off the bat, which is important when trying to communicate to the reader. It does not indicate the name of the Senate committee like the other lead does, but I don't think that is totally necessary for the audience to be captivated and interested in reading more. The writer does indicate in the second paragraph that it is the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that approved this resolution.

Posted by Allison Hall at 5:03 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)