Using Sources: A Critique of Two Articles

1. In the article, "As India Thrives, It's People Remain Hungry,” reporter Vikas Bajaj of The New York Times adequately gets himself around the rural regions of India, asking everyday citizens as well as knowledgeable experts on the specific topic of the nation’s widespread issue of hunger. From the very first sentence of the story, he grabs the reader’s attention, intriguing them and letting them envision the personal connections to the crisis firsthand. In addition, he seems to know exactly how to provide a well-organized balance between a source’s words and supporting background information, switching between the two in a way that builds the reader’s attention upward throughout the story. The way that he matches every one, or at least most, of Arun Namder Talele’s words, descriptions of how his onion crops were destroyed by a storm, leaving him and his family without a source of income, with detailed information regarding the nationwide severity of the issue gives the story a deeper sense of meaning and value. Furthermore, as the story progresses, Bajaj enters new angles and interviews another Indian farmer, Sandeep Ram Karshanbakr, who seems to have found a method of prevailing from the effects brought on by the violent, crop-destroying storms by using a newly installed drip-irrigation system. This aspect of the issue gives readers a new light, allowing them to believe in answers and solutions to these excruciating difficulties. Another source that Bajaj utilizes, Kashik Basu, a professor at Cornell University and chief economic adviser to the Indian finance minister, uses his deep-seeded knowledge as an insider and as an intellectual to verify the growing troubles in India regarding hunger. In addition, he speaks of the potential for people such as Talele and Karshanbakr to rise to the occasion and find new ways of overhauling the old system through innovation and reinvention. Bajaj’s approach to this story gives a wide variety of angles to the story in ways that allow those on the outside to peek inward and greatly understand the people, the problems, and the solutions.

2. In “House Republicans Divided On Spending Cuts,” an article by Washington Post staff writer Lori Montgomery, a variety of sources are used to portray the economic struggles and debate within Congress regarding the ways in which federal funds can or should be used. She begins at the top, discussing Speaker of the House John Boehner and introducing his efforts to cut government spending while also working to avoid a potentially disastrous confrontation with the White House. Next, she grabs information and opinions from an emerging member of the Republican Party, Congresswoman Michele Bachmann of Minnesota, who has a different view on the issue. As head of the House Tea Party Caucus, Montgomery uses Bachmann’s staunch anti-tax, anti-government spending views to represent another angle. Following this inclusion, Montgomery uses an opinion from Mike Connolly, a spokesman for Club for Growth and a political pundit, which stated his belief in the importance of the restructured party to gain ground by fulfilling their promises. Next, she quotes activist Tamara Colbert, stating her views regarding this inner need within the party to stand its fiscal ground. Although I, personally, would have liked to see a quote or opinion from a Democrat, or anyone not in favor of the Republicans’ spending plans, I feel that this article is well organized. It takes the views of the old and new politicians, activists, and pundits and joins them together for the purpose of providing angles to readers who may or may not be completely knowledgeable about the story. This inclusion of values and viewpoints makes the article a great, intriguing, and concise read.