http://www.kmbc.com/article/chiefs-announce-suspension-of-marcus-peters-ahead-of-sundays-game-versus-the-raiders/14295553 This article is good because it is to the point. I think that it gave all the necessary information and was pretty specific saying what happened during the game. The article was really brief so it was kind of hard to get more information, but despite that the readers can still get the story from it which is a plus. The story needed to have more information or at least elaborate on more of he situation and why it happened the way it did. They could've put a video in to show what Marcus Peters did, or a link or something to show what happened so people can better understand. I also think that they needed to specify more that the chiefs are suspending him, and the NFL hasn't. This is knowledge I already have so when clicking into the article it already reiterated things I knew and that was not beneficial for me. One thing I will take from this is...
Popular posts from this blog
http://www.cnn.com/2017/11/30/europe/donald-trump-theresa-may-twitter-spat/index.html In this story, the writer did a good job of explaining what happened and the people related to what is going on. They wrote what the issue was and described what happened in the first paragraph which was very helpful for someone who would like together the quick information from clicking on the article. one thing I would change about the is the organization piece If I'm looking for a specific detail on one part of the story, I have to red the whole thing rather than scrolling to a place where it might be shown. I think it would be helpful to split it up into sections where finding out more would be easier. I do like the way they wrote the story in the beginning they hooked the reader and I will try to implement that into my work. They started the story with the main points and that was helpful, but if I wanted to know more it wouldn't have been as easy to find quickly.
http://www.kmbc.com/article/mother-of-two-20-dies-one-day-after-flu-diagnosis/14200779 the good things about this article is that they got interviews and used quotes in it, but it kind of just shows what is in the video. I think from reading the article and not watching the video someone would be able to understand what happened. Something I would suggest is maybe to elaborate on the children because they're in the title of the article to grab the readers attention, but it doesn't say a lot about them. A question I was left with was how the flu killed her and they said one thing about pneumonia, but I would like to understand more about how it got to the severity or how she may have contracted a deadly case of a curable virus. I will implement the idea of using the the scientific facts and the health alerts like the stats they used in the end of the article. They said that only 10% of this years Australian vaccine was affective so it meant that they couldn't t...
Comments
Post a Comment