Planes, Trains and Automobiles aren't the only thing killing Earth

| | Comments (3)
Although both spot articles deal with our environment, they differ in many ways. Personally, I found the article on emissions to be more interesting than the one about reforestation. However, I feel like the story about reforestation was a better example of a spot news article than the one about the emissions. Nevertheless, each article has its own strengths

  • Even though reforestation is a major issue all over the world,b choosing to focus on one particular forest, as well as  a smaller group of individuals affected by the layoffs, the author of this spot news article helps readers to identify with the problems.
  • The author chooses a large state park to focus on not only because it will be well-known, but because it will have more drastic budget cuts than a smaller park probably would.
  • She gives good ratios in her article: Gardeners who once tended to a dozen acres now are responsible for about 40, after hiring freezes have reduced their workforce in recent years. Many park construction projects have slowed or come to a halt. 
  • However, at the close of her article, she has a more general quote, to remind readers that this is not the only place where parks and people are being affected by the economy: "Who hasn't said parks are the lungs of the city? Who in San Francisco doesn't appreciate that?" he said. "The parks will survive."

  • Ethanol fuel isn't a new idea, but by focusing on a specific field which utilizes the fuel, the author forces readers to acknowledge how much it really helps our environment.
  • Gives an example on how much of a difference the ethanol fuel really does make:IndyCar uses 20,000 fewer gallons of fuel and emits only trace amounts of carbon monoxide.
  • This article does not seem as focused on one spot as the other article--the author goes off into a tangent about other racing programs, such as NASCAR.
  • This article tries to focus on what one specific racer did to help the environment, which makes the piece better as  a whole, because it allows readers to get a more in depth look at the results.


Katie Vann said:

I agree with you that the second article seemed to be more interesting than the first although they both seem well written. I really liked how you broke down each article and discussed their strengths and weaknesses. You definately listed some points that I hadn't thought of before and it helped me to see parts of the articles in a different perspective.

Aja Hannah said:

Whoo to IndyCar! But yea it did seem to be a little less of a spot article because a lot of the information could have been gained without the reporter being on location. Also, to me the place wasn't as specific as the park article.

Jessie Krehlik said:

Even though I thought the second article was more interesting, I definitely think the first article was a better example of spot news. I'm not saying the second article wasn't spot news--I'm just saying that it had a lot of information in it that involved other types of racing. At least with the park article, it stuck primarily with information about budget cuts.

Leave a comment

Type the characters you see in the picture above.