Emily Katz
April 1, 2011
The Guardian article “Spain’s unemployed: one in five under 30 still looking for that first job” by Gary Younge a strong human element is seen from the narrative lede. The journalist begins the article with the case of the 34-year old Jesus who is going to China to find a job. The lede is then immediately backed up by Jesus’ quote about there being more opportunities in China. The journalist then presents the statistics (43% of Spain’s youth are unemployed) but put it in relation to the rest of the EU, saying that it is the “highest” and is also “double the average.” The journalist then further extrapolates the data by comparing Spain’s youth unemployment rate with that of African countries Tunisia and Egypt. The comparisons shed light on the significance of the statistics the journalist is presenting the reader with. The journalist obtained information from those affected by going to a class at an unemployment-training center. All those at the center said that they would leave the country to find a job, which suggests just how bad the job market is in the country. The journalist also compares the current emigration pattern in Spain to that of the 1960s and 70s, saying how back then the emigrants were mostly low-skilled workers whereas now the well-educated are emigrating. The journalist succeeded in helping make sense of what is happening in Spain’s job market, and furthermore, their economy.
In the New York Times article “Food Inflation Kept Hidden in Tinier Bags” by Stephanie Clifford and Catherine Rampell, the story begins with a hard news lede. The article adds a human element by interviewing those affected. A consumer said that her usual three boxes of pasta now has a smaller yield. The article is also an example of interpretive investigative reporting, for the journalist writes that Ms. Stauber began inspecting her other purchases aisle by aisle, and the journalist used her findings and data in the article. The article also includes a quote from a marketing professor at Harvard Business School, which provides the expert’s quote to make sense of what the companies are doing with the packaging and their motives. The journalists also incorporate quotes from a Kraft spokesman and Heinz’s chairman and chief executive. The article contains all of the important elements without over-crowding the article with numbers and statistics. Compared to the Guardian article, this article seemed to have a little less analysis of the larger issues at stake but more variety of sources interviewed.
The “F.D.A. Panel to Consider Warning for Artificial Food Colorings” article in the New York Times by Gardiner Harris also contains a hard news lede. The article quotes an F.D.A. report, but then adds an human element by interviewing a mother of two children who said that her son’s behavioral problems ceased when she eliminated artificial food coloring from his diet. However, though the human element is great, I am not sure if this counts as evidence for there is no scientific proof. The journalist then presents a behavioral pediatrician’s counter argument of saying that the mother’s claim is one of those urban legends. The journalist also puts this current panel debate in comparison to the 1950 ban of Orange No.1 dye and 1976 ban of Red No.2. The article also cites how “citizen petitions are routinely dismissed by the F.D.A. without much comment,” which exposes how perhaps the F.D.A. should be more responsive to the citizen’s concerns. Of the three, I would say this article was the weakest as the quotes obtained from the sources were not very informative. The article also focused more on the F.D.A. panel and the companies rather than those affected.
These are all terrific examples. Excellent reading
ReplyDelete