Reflection on Local Revision Process

That's all folks! So, what did I think?

What were some of the successes (or, things that went right) during this week’s process work? Explain, with evidence.

I definitely feel confident in the piece that I've created and I hope that those watching it. I cleaned up the voiceover and improved upon some of the graphics I presented which I hope improve the overall quality of the project.

What were some of the challenges (or, things that went wrong) during this week’s process work? Explain, with evidence.

Finding enough video and picture content to fill my 9 minutes of video was difficult, especially since some of the places I'm talking about are not well publicized such as specific mosques and Yemeni prisons.

How do you think next week will go, based on your experiences this week?

Since this was the last project before reflections, I'm ready to see how my work has changed over the semester.

How are you feeling about the project overall at this point?

I feel good! I'm pretty proud of what I've made for my final cut, and hope it's informative to everyone who watches it.

Editorial Report

It's the end of the line, but I still had time to make a few changes.

Rough Draft Closing (8:02 - 8:22) - Final Draft (8:32 - 9:01)

How did the content change (even slightly - details matter!) when you re-edited it? Why do you think the content is being communicated more effectively in the re-edited version?

I gave more of a broad statement at the end instead of just trying to cram it in at the very end of my rough draft like I did before, so that my opinion would be more clear and so that I could imply there is still a debate to be had on the issue.

How did the form change (even slightly - details matter!) when you re-edited it? Why do you think the form is presenting the content more effectively in the re-edited version?

I changed the closing to seem more like a real closing by summing up my argument rather than just a simple ending sentence like I had before.

Editorial Report

Alright, it's pretty much all over for this project, so what did I end up changing?

Rough Intro (0:00 - 0:53) - Final Intro (0:00 - 1:03)

How did the content change (even slightly - details matter!) when you re-edited it? Why do you think the content is being communicated more effectively in the re-edited version?

I talked a bit more about my personal argument in the project, since I feel like in the rough draft of the introduction I really didn't talk about it at all. Also, I rerecorded the voiceover since that was a complaint last time.

How did the form change (even slightly - details matter!) when you re-edited it? Why do you think the form is presenting the content more effectively in the re-edited version?

I added a title screen to give the viewers more of a brief introduction rather than just starting with a video, which I think will help give an idea of what exactly I'll be talking about rather than just guessing.

Revised Post to Peer Reviewers

It's almost time to be done with Project 3, so what does my project look like?

Fine Cut

Key information about your particular project that you would like anyone who peer reviews your draft to know

I think it's important to say that working on a video was definitely the hardest of the three projects so far, but I hope that I've presented all of my information well.

Major issues or weaknesses in the “Fine Cut” that you’re already aware of (as well as anything you’d like to know from your editors about those weaknesses)

There's a few places where I wanted to have video rather than just pictures, but in many places it's just hard to find that kind of footage.

Major virtues or strengths in the “Fine Cut” that you’re already aware of (as well as anything you’d like to know from your editors about those strengths)

I really like the way that I've laid out all of my information, and think that by presenting the facts of the case, I was able to make a compelling argument in favor of Awlaki's death.

Peer Review for Alec Eulano

We're all publishing soon, so what else needs to change?

For this review, I'll be looking at Alec Eulano's rough draft of Project 3 "An Unpopular Opinion Protecting Unpopular Opinions" (He has it set so an arizona.edu email is needed to view it). My comments can be found here.

An explanation of the peer review activity you selected for the project you reviewed

So I'm going to be reviewing Alec's QRG and making some copy editing suggestions in order to help him improve his piece before we publish tomorrow.

An explanation of how you think you helped the author with your feedback

I think that Alec has a decent rough draft, but don't think it has all of the necessary items to make it a true QRG. Without changing the graphics and possibly changing the voice of the QRG, it may not be seen as very effective.

An explanation of how you incorporated something from the suggested Student’s Guide readings (or any other course materials, if you’d prefer) into your feedback

I used my knowledge from my own work on my QRG along with the genre examples on D2L from student examples and in the news.

One thing about their work that you admired or think you could learn from

I think that Alec is trying to tackle an important issue, and I hope that my own work is going to seem that way as well.

Peer Review for Gabby Dietrich

So now that we're almost ready to publish, what else can we change?

For this review, I'll be looking at Gabby Dietrich's rough draft of Project 3 which currently does not have a title. My comments can be found here.

An explanation of the peer review activity you selected for the project you reviewed

I'll be reviewing Gabby's rough draft of her video essay, and making some copy editing suggestions on how to improve her piece.

An explanation of how you think you helped the author with your feedback

I think that this is a very close example of what a video essay should be, but it needs to have a few minor edits to make it perfect, which I hope that I can help with.

An explanation of how you incorporated something from the suggested Student’s Guide readings (or any other course materials, if you’d prefer) into your feedback

As I'm working on my own video essay, I thought that having quicker edits and less empty space will help greatly as shown in the genre examples of other student and professional work.

One thing about their work that you admired or think you could learn from

I like the way that Gabby brings in multiple different points to help make her argument, and think that I could improve my own argument by adding more concrete evidence.

Peer Review For Jack Auslen

Let's get to reviewing!

For this review, I'll be looking at Jack Auslen's rough draft of Project 3 which currently does not have a title. My comments can be found here.

An explanation of the peer review activity you selected for the project you reviewed

I'll be reviewing Jack's rough draft of his college essay, and I'll be talking about a little about the form that needs to be used in a college essay.

An explanation of how you think you helped the author with your feedback

While I think he has a good start, there is still a lot of work to do to make it a true essay. Without citations, it is hard for the author to gain credibility with their readers. Also, I think it would benefit Jack to make it less story like and more factual.

An explanation of how you incorporated something from the suggested Student’s Guide readings (or any other course materials, if you’d prefer) into your feedback

When reading the essays posted on D2L, it was very evident that in text citations are a must for a college essay, but Jack did not have any at this time.

One thing about their work that you admired or think you could learn from

I think Jack is trying to take on a very interesting and very important topic, and it's interesting to see his take on something that hasn't quite unfolded all the way yet.

Peer Review For PJ Noghrehchi

It's once again time for peer reviews folks!

So, now that I've gotten some of my own work done, let's take a look at PJ Noghrehchi's essay entitled "Serenading at the University of Arizona: A Promotion of Rape Culture or A 21st Century Expression of Entertainment for All?" You can find my comments here.

An explanation of the peer review activity you selected for the project you reviewed

I'll be reviewing PJ's rough draft of his college essay, where I'll be making a couple of suggestions about the form that he uses while writing.

An explanation of how you think you helped the author with your feedback

I think that PJ has a strong start but can use a bit more refinement and maybe even a bit more formal tone when writing to help more accurately portray his points.

An explanation of how you incorporated something from the suggested Student’s Guide readings (or any other course materials, if you’d prefer) into your feedback

After looking at the genre examples on D2L, it was apparent that there was often 2-3 sentences of explanation for each quote, but that was not always the case in PJ's work.

One thing about their work that you admired or think you could learn from

They added a very personal touch to their story which I thought was very interesting, and helped make the story seem more real.

Editorial Report

So now that I've got a whole rough draft, what changed from last week?

Original Intro - New Intro (0:00 - 0:53)

How did the content change (even slightly - details matter!) when you re-edited it? Why do you think the content is being communicated more effectively in the re-edited version?

After the first video segment, the introduction changed because I made the goal of the video more clear by telling viewers that it's time to find the cause, rather than introducing only the general topic.

How did the form change (even slightly - details matter!) when you re-edited it? Why do you think the form is presenting the content more effectively in the re-edited version?

I edited the video to show a secondary clip of Alwaki rather than having a static image because I believed it would be far more interesting to the viewer than just a regular picture.

Editorial Report

So, we've gotten this far, but what's changed?

Original Closing - Rough Draft Closing (8:02 - 8:22)

How did the content change (even slightly - details matter!) when you re-edited it? Why do you think the content is being communicated more effectively in the re-edited version?
I think that by establishing a call to action to the viewer that it makes it a more effective ending since I'm asking to the reader to do something they may not have thought about before watching.

How did the form change (even slightly - details matter!) when you re-edited it? Why do you think the form is presenting the content more effectively in the re-edited version?

By adding some different graphics and better narration, I believe that the viewer will be more engaged when the call to action comes than they were before.

Reflection on Global Revision Process

It's published, but what do I think about it all so far?

What were some of the successes (or, things that went right) during this week’s process work? Explain, with evidence.

I think that by publishing my rough draft I've made really good progress so far, and I think that I'll actually end up keeping most of it which isn't always the case.

What were some of the challenges (or, things that went wrong) during this week’s process work? Explain, with evidence.

Finding video segments to go along with my talking points is sometimes very difficult, especially when talking about the background of Awlaki such as where he used to be an imam.

How do you think next week will go, based on your experiences this week?

I think that I've got a solid base to work off of and edit next week, so I'll be looking forward to it.

How are you feeling about the project overall at this point?

I'm actually feeling pretty good since I have a solid rough draft and some ideas on how I can make it better as well.

Open Post to Peer Reviewers

Alright, it's time to get this thing published!

Link To Rough Draft

Key information about your particular project that you would like anyone who peer reviews your draft to know

It was hard to introduce this topic without any bias due to its very complicated political nature and the ways in which  people already have their opinions, so please let me know if you feel that I'm biased.

Major issues or weaknesses in the “Rough Cut” that you’re already aware of (as well as anything you’d like to know from your editors about those weaknesses)

I know that the graphical cuts may be a bit crude, especially at the end, but I'm working on finding some better ones as well as more videos rather than pictures.

Major virtues or strengths in the “Rough Cut” that you’re already aware of (as well as anything you’d like to know from your editors about those strengths)

I think that I do a pretty good job of showing the viewer how Awlaki's actions over the course of the past decade have caused this controversy, and hope that it shows in what I've produced so far.

Peer Review for Alexis Morrison

To help give feedback to other students in the course and find out some new things myself, I'm reviewing Alexis Morrison's "Production Report A."

An explanation of the peer review activity you selected for the project you reviewed

I'll be reviewing Alexis's first production report, or a rough draft of one piece of their project so far. In her case, it was  My comments can be found here.

An explanation of how you think you helped the author with your feedback

I think that by providing a couple of content and copy editing suggestions, it will help to make the piece stronger overall and more clearly define the piece.

An explanation of how you incorporated something from the suggested Student’s Guide readings (or any other course materials, if you’d prefer) into your feedback

When looking at the genre examples for standard college essays, the introduction paragraphs are usually very specific, and focus on one very specific topic rather than something broader.

One thing about their work that you admired or think you could learn from

I like the way that they produced their own quote to work from, and showed how that thinking could be adapted to fit their argument.

Peer Review for Fernando Coronado

Alright, it's time to get down to business and start seeing how we want to make changes. In this post, I'll be talking about Fernando Coronado's "Production Report 11a."

An explanation of the peer review activity you selected for the project you reviewed

I'll be reviewing Fernando's first production report, which in this case is a rough draft of his podcast introduction which provides background information about the topic and author. My comments can be found here.

An explanation of how you think you helped the author with your feedback

As someone who's done a podcast, I found a few things missing from the introduction that I think would make it much stronger, and also hope that he changes some of his wording to seem like a more credible source.

An explanation of how you incorporated something from the suggested Student’s Guide readings (or any other course materials, if you’d prefer) into your feedback

After reviewing many podcasts for my own in project 2, there was always lots of sound effects and music, and also the author always did their best to seem credible, both of which I think Fernando will gain from.

One thing about their work that you admired or think you could learn from

The way they introduced the game itself was very helpful as someone who isn't familiar with it, and I'm going to try and do so with my own topic a bit better.

Reflection on Production Phase

Now that I've got some rough drafts of my content up, how do I feel about this week?

What were some of the successes (or, things that went right) during this week’s process work? 

I feel like I'm getting better at working in the video genre since I haven't in quite a long time, and with the intro and closing sections of my project done, I have a good idea of where to go next.

What were some of the challenges (or, things that went wrong) during this week’s process work? 

Finding a way to extract video content from different outlets was a challenge, since there was footage I wanted to use for my video but wasn't really able to get it for my own use without a bit of messing around.

How do you think next week will go, based on your experiences this week?

I think that next week will go well as I go into the real content of my project since that's where most of the controversy is going to end up being.

How are you feeling about the project overall at this point?

I'm feeling pretty confident that it's going to go well, and that I'll be fairly successful in getting my points across.

Production Report

After working on my introduction, I thought it was a good idea to work on the closing so I knew where I would be ending up.

Content Outline - Rough Draft Closing

Outline Item - Closing
Over the years, it became evident that despite his peaceful beginnings, Awlaki quickly became radicalized after the events of 9/11 and the invasion of Iraq. But were the drastic actions taken by the US worth the precedent being set of killing American citizens?

How did you decide to use form to present your content in the raw material you’ve shared here? How did the conventions of your chosen genre influence your choices?

When watching the genre examples on D2L, it seemed like most of them ended with a decent summary of the events and some sort of call to action, so I decided to make it so that I recapped the events that took place and asked the viewer to think about it in their own mind.

How did the production of this raw material go? What kinds of any hiccups, challenges, successes, creative epiphanies, etc. occurred during the process?

It was tough for me to decide on what to say, since the topic is going to have a lot of different responses from those with differing opinions on the death of al-Awlaki and how it should have been handled.

Production Report

It's time to get started on Project 3, so I thought I'd make my introduction first.

Content Outline - Rough Draft Intro
Outline Item - Intro
For my opening, I'm probably going to try and open with a clip of one of Awlaki's moderate teachings, to show the stark contrast between the man that was killed and the man that used to be. I'll introduce the topic and the key events leading up to the day of September 30, 2011.

How did you decide to use form to present your content in the raw material you’ve shared here? How did the conventions of your chosen genre influence your choices?

Since it is a video, I thought it would be important to have something open that wasn't just myself talking over a static picture, and I think that by introducing the topic through al-Awlaki himself it would make it more interesting for the viewer.

How did the production of this raw material go? What kinds of any hiccups, challenges, successes, creative epiphanies, etc. occurred during the process?

Finding an opening video was somewhat difficult, since YouTube has removed most of the videos from al-Awlaki due to requests for their takedown from the US government. Other than that though, it went pretty well!

Peer Review for David Klebosky

Looking at other works within the project help me better understand what I need to improve on, so I reviewed the pre-production phase project work of David Klebosky, entitled "Research Report."

An explanation of the peer review activity you selected for the project you reviewed

I chose to review their research report, a guide to the sources that they will use to seem like a credible author and back up the claims that they will be making during their project. My comments can be found here.

An explanation of how you think you helped the author with your feedback

I think that by saying that he is doing well with his sources he can be more confident in the evidence that he is going to use within his project since he has a good understand of the sources he's going to be using in terms of research.

An explanation of how you incorporated something from the suggested Student’s Guide readings (or any other course materials, if you’d prefer) into your feedback

When looking through the genre examples on D2L, most of them had a wide variety of source types, as David does in his research report, with examples ranging from YouTube clips to books to stand up comedy shows which shows that he is doing well in terms of diverse sources.

One thing about their work that you admired or think you could learn from

I really like the amount of diversity in the types of sources David was using, since most of my sources were printed sources unlike his which ranged greatly.

Peer Review for Emily Bond

Now that we're all getting started on our new projects, it's a good idea to give some feedback. This week I reviewed the pre-production phase project work of Emily Bond, entitled "Content Outline."

An explanation of the peer review activity you selected for the project you reviewed

I chose to review their content outline, which is a general guideline by which their project will be structured, and the evidence and points that they're going to make. My comments can be found here.

An explanation of how you think you helped the author with your feedback

I think that by providing exact sources for their evidence, it'll be easier for them to both reference the evidence for themselves and to have to the reader / listener possibly look into the source. Also, by having a solid opening they can grab the viewer's attention more effectively than a statistic.

An explanation of how you incorporated something from the suggested Student’s Guide readings (or any other course materials, if you’d prefer) into your feedback

When looking at all of the genre examples, the opening was often something flashy or interesting rather than just starting directly with a voice over.

One thing about their work that you admired or think you could learn from

I like the way that Emily plans to include a lot of statistics and evidence within her project, and think that this could be nice to have for myself, but know that it's tough to have some of those things for my specific argument.

Reflection on Pre-Production

Project 3 is off to a good start, so I'd like to share some of my thoughts on it.

What were some of the successes (or, things that went right) during this week’s process work? 

I think that publishing my content outline and research report are definitely going to help me get started on next week's work with a substantial headstart on the work I'm going to need to do.

What were some of the challenges (or, things that went wrong) during this week’s process work? 

Working on the research report definitely took a good deal of time, but I feel that after working on it, I'm more well versed in the topic despite having to spend so much time getting to know all of my sources.

How do you think next week will go, based on your experiences this week?

I'm hoping that next week is going to go pretty well since I've got most of my research figured out already and the general outline of my project already done.

How are you feeling about the project overall at this point?

I'm feeling pretty good about it so far since I've done a decent amount of the work required to get started, and now most of the work needing to get done is going to be production where I'm able to use all of the research gathered so far.

Production Schedule

So now that I have a general idea of what I'm going to be doing, when am I going to be doing it?

Project 3 Schedule

What Is To Be Done

• Finding more video clips to use
• Recording audio voiceovers
• Production reports
• Rough draft of video essay
• Peer review for production and post-production
• Editing sessions
• Publish final draft

Location

• Both my dorm room for recording and research, and the library multimedia zone to use their editing programs

Resources Required

• Microphone
• Audio recording software
• Video editing software
• Laptop

Date Completed

• Calendar - April 3rd
• Rough Cut - April 12th
• Fine Cut - April 18th
• Final Draft - April 24th

Post-Completion Changes
None so far

Content Outline

So, how am I going to organize my project over the next coming weeks?

Opening
For my opening, I'm probably going to try and open with a clip of one of Awlaki's moderate teachings, to show the stark contrast between the man that was killed and the man that used to be. I'll introduce the topic and the key events leading up to the day of September 30, 2011.

Section 1 - Introduce the Pre-9/11 background of Awlaki

• Awlaki Serving as an Imam - As a religious leader in his mosque, Awlaki became a respected figure within his community. Shows how he 
• Awlaki's Time in San Diego - Remembered as a beloved imam, members of his mosque are unsure of what changed in the future. Shows that he was once a loving man who drastically changed his later life.

Section 1 - Awlaki's Radical Preaching

• Terror Watch - After being connected to the Fort Hood shootings, Awlaki was put on a terror watch list and a warrant was put out for his arrest. This shows how he was transforming from a peaceful imam to a powerful terror advocate.
• Financing Terror - Awlaki began calling for jihad and the financing of various terror groups after returning to Yemen in 2004. Once again, this shows how he was becoming a radical extremist from his peaceful roots.

Section 3 - The Legal Argument

• The Manhunt - After searching for years for Awlaki, the US government finally found and killed Awlaki in a drone strike. This shows that the US was willing to take extreme measures against as US citizen.
• The Memo - This discusses the secret memo used as legal justification for the killing of Awlaki despite his citizenship. It shows that the US believes it had a sound legal argument for the strike despite his citizenship.

Closing
Over the years, it became evident that despite his peaceful beginnings, Awlaki quickly became radicalized after the events of 9/11 and the invasion of Iraq. But were the drastic actions taken by the US worth the precedent being set of killing American citizens?

Rhetorical Analysis of Project 3

So now that we're getting started on Project 3, I should probably know what I'm going to be talking about, or at least how I'll be doing that.

How will you relate to your subject for Project 3? 

As an avid fan of civilian drone usage, I have a good amount of background knowledge on the subject, and my ECE major makes me somewhat familiar with the systems used on drones. Also, it is a fairly recent topic that I have some memory of, along with being interesting and controversial to nearly every American citizen since it was another American that was targeted.

What are the preconceptions, previously held opinions and/or potential areas for personal bias that you should be aware of for Project 3? 

I am strongly against the usage of drones to kill Awlaki, but after reading some of the reports on the subject it may have been the best option available to us. Also, I am astounded by the lack of political controversy on the topic since killing an American citizen should have been the cause for debate far greater than a secret memo. However, I will do my best to provide an unbiased representation of the controversy in my argument, especially since I am going to be attempting to explain the cause of the killing.

Audience

How are you thinking about your audience for this project? Who are you going to make this for? 

I am going to try and focus my project on those who have only a cursory understanding of the topic, rather than those who have an in depth understanding, since they already know the reasoning behind his death.

What beliefs and assumptions might this audience already hold? What position are they likely to take on this issue? How will you respond to that position?

They're not likely to hold a strong opinion on Awlaki specifically, but they may have an opinion on the killing of American citizens and the usage of drones.

How might they react to your argument?

I don't think they'll react too strongly since I'm only explaining the cause, but they may still be unhappy with the act itself rather than my explanation.

How are you going to relate to or connect with your audience? Are there any specific words, ideas or ways of arguing that will help you relate to them in this way?

It's going to be tough to relate to them due to the controversy happening across the country, but I may be able to connect with some of the political thoughts.

Think of one specific person or a set of people you know personally or professionally who fall within the definition of ‘target audience’ you’re using for Project 3. What could you tell them or say to them in order to convince them of your perspective? What would need to happen for them to agree with you?

I think that for a general audience member to agree with me they'd just have to listen to the facts since they shouldn't have too strong an opinion on the topic so far.

Purpose/Message

What do you want to accomplish with Project 3? What affect do you want it to have on your intended audience?

After watching the video for my project, I hope that the viewer will consider the fact that not everything the government is doing is above reproach, and that there should be something they're willing to get involved over and ask questions about.

Once you’ve done all your research and figured out what you think about the controversy you’ve chosen, what still needs to be accomplished?

I'm still going to have to acquire video clips to use in my production, along with recording sessions for the voice over and the editing of the footage to create my finished product.

Context

What course genre will you be writing in for Project 3?

I'll be working the genre of video essay to help give the most exposure to the viewer.

What kinds of audience expectations come along with this genre, generally?

Within the video essay genre, viewers will be expecting various video clips that relate to the topic at hand, along with a voiceover which helps explain what the author wants you to know. Also, there will clips of other sources besides myself.

What is your history working in the genre you have selected for Project 3?

I have some limited experience from video production in high school, but in terms of audio editing I have experience from high school and the podcast from project 2.

Describe your comfort level and general feelings about the genre. How will they affect your work on Project 3?

I'm fairly comfortable with the aspects of video editing, but know that I'll have to remind myself of some of the ways of editing the footage. 

What are the two most effective conventions in this genre, in your opinion? Why? Be specific.

The most effective conventions for video essays are outside clips of other views on your topic, and the voice over where you are explaining the points you want to make.

Are there any historical events that might impact how your audience perceives your argument or the kind of background information or evidence you need to include? 

The events of 9/11, Awlaki's life until his death in 2011, the congressional passage of the AUMF, and the legal memo produced which allowed the government to kill Awlaki.

Who else is talking about this topic? Provide us with working hyperlinks to coverage of the controversy on FOUR different media outlets.

New York Times
The Guardian
NPR
CNN

What are the three or four major counter-arguments you’ll have to respond to, based upon what people are saying in the press/media? Be specific and cite your sources using working hyperlinks.

Some of the things I'll have to make points for are the ideas that Awlaki's influence was global, the idea that some of his teachings are moderate, the secrecy of the legal memo, and the lack of political condemnation of the attack.

Research Report

So to get started on this project, I'm looking to get researching on the topic of Anwar al-Awlaki and the story of his death.

Source Information - "The Lessons of Anwar al-Awlaki" by Scott Shane, New York Times
Author's Credibility - A national security reporter for NYT since 2004, reporter since 1983 with the Baltimore Sun
Audience - Put towards general audiences, shown by introduction of topic and various images and videos in the piece.
Purpose - Purpose is to explain the events leading up to Awlaki's death, and the reasoning behind it. Shown in the various dated sections of the piece and
Extra - Cites a variety of sources to explain the events, including FBI Memos and previous teachings by Awlaki

Source Information - "Here’s the Secret Memo That Justified Anwar al-Awlaki Killing" by Zeke J Miller, Time Magazine
Author's Credibility - A political reporter for TIME, was first WH correspondent for BuzzFeed, editor at the Yale Daily News.
Audience - Less of a general audience due to the more technical nature of the writing, and the fact that it simply displays the 31 page document rather than going into detail.
Purpose - Show that the DOJ has released the memo finally, by having it displayed and giving background on the subject for new readers.
Extra - Links to other story about Congress' attempt to get the memo released, and was posted with the tag
"Correction: The original version of this story misstated the circumstances of the memo’s release. It was released by a federal court."

Source Information - "Two-Year Manhunt Led to Killing of Awlaki in Yemen" by Mark Mazzetti, Eric Schmitt, and Robert F. Worth, New York Times
Author's Credibility - Mazzetti is a Pulitzer prize winning national security writer for the NYT, Eric Schmitt is a Pulitzer prize winner NYT writer since 1983.
Audience - For general readers of NYT, reinforces this with various images of Awlaki and with video evidence of his activities.
Purpose - The purpose is to inform the reader of how the US searched for Awlaki over the years, and does so by explaining the process and some of reasoning behind his killing.
Extra - Shows the tag "Correction: September 30, 2011 - An earlier version of this article said that Yemeni forces had carried out the attack." and that "A version of this article appears in print on October 1, 2011, on page A1 of the New York edition"

Source Information - "Al Qaeda Group Confirms Deaths of Two American Citizens" by Charlie Savage, New York Times
Author's Credibility - Began writing in 1999 for the Miami Herald, received Pulitzer prize in 2009 for National Reporting.
Audience - Based on hosting, cite two betrayals of audience
Purpose - To show that the reports coming out of Awlaki's death were correct. Shows this with sources within Al-Qaeda, along with quoting an NYT story.
Extra - Part of the At War series by the NYT, documenting post 9-11 conflicts. quotes SITE intelligence group.

Source Information - "Drone Strike in Yemen Was Aimed at Awlaki" by Mark Mazzetti, New York Times
Author's Credibility - Pulitzer prize winning national security writer, and reporting on military and nat security since 2001
Audience - The audience is the general readers of NYT, and the author keeps the article short and to the point to keep it this way, along with not using any jargon or little known events.
Purpose - The purpose of the article is to provide context to the a U.S. drone strike in Yemen, which he does by explaining its target Awlaki and the reasoning behind his targeting.
Extra - Also shows credibility with disclaimer "A version of this article appears in print on May 7, 2011, on page A11 of the New York edition" and hyperlinks to other reports from Yemen.

Source Information - "US cited controversial law in decision to kill American citizen by drone" by Spencer Ackerman, The Guardian
Author's Credibility - Pulitzer prize winning journalist for public service, and is now the national security editor at Guardian US.
Audience - While the guardian is usually a general paper, this beraks from that by using terms few have heard of including AUMF, and doesn't give much background.
Purpose - The purpose is to help exlpain why the US decided that it had the legal justification for killing Awlaki, shown by the descrption of the memo and the circumstances of its release.
Extra - Links and discusses the 2013 leak of some of the memo and the White Houses's response to the memo's release.

Source Information - "How US tracked Anwar al-Awlaki to his death in Yemen" by Paul Harris and Jamie Doward, The Guardian
Author's Credibility - Now senior executive producer for Al Jazeera America, also a correspondent for the Guardian and The Observer.
Audience - General audiences, shown by the use of images and general terms for the use of technology towards tracking Awlaki.
Purpose - To explain to readers how to the CIA and other agenices worked to find Awlaki, along with background of Samir Khan, another American killed in the attack.
Extra - Talks about other responses to the attack, including that of Republic candidates and the support around the political spectrum.

Source Information - "Anwar al-Awlaki's extrajudicial murder" by Michael Ratner, The Guardian
Author's Credibility - President of the Center for Constitutional Rights and one of the attorneys for Julian Assange.
Audience - Very broad since it is more of an editorial style. Uses lots of links to explain rather than explaining it himself
Purpose - To have the reader question whether or not the killing was justified, by asking them questions and explaining how the law seems to reflect the outcome.
Extra - Talks about the ACLU's case against the US and explains that Awlaki was a radical cleric.

Source Information - "Anwar al-Aulaqi, U.S. born cleric linked to al-Qaeda, killed in Yemen" by Sudarsan Raghavan, The Washington Post
Author's Credibility - Washington Post's Cairo Bureau Chief, along with gaining the George Polk award for his work.
Audience - More of a general audience, explains the contributions of the key players in the controversy along with providing a few infographics.
Purpose - To explain the reasoning behind Awlaki's death, along with explaining the process by which he became a target.
Extra - Comes from Yemen, not the United States, along with the disclaimer that "Staff writers William Branigin, Greg Miller, Karen DeYoung, William Wan, Michelle Boorstein, Greg Jaffe, Aaron C. Davis and Kafia Hosh in Washington and special correspondent Mohammed al-Qadhi in Sanaa contributed to this report."

Source Information - "U.S. airstrike that killed American in Yemen raises legal, ethical questions" by Craig Whitlock, The Washington Post
Author's Credibility - Worked as Berlin Bureau Chief for 6 years, and has wroked for the Post since 1998.
Audience - Slightly less general due to it not using any images or videos, but still keeps a decent amount of background information for the new reader.
Purpose - To explain how the killing of Awlaki raises legal questions due to the nature of his US citizenship and some of hte reasoning behind his killing.
Extra - Provides plenty of hyperlinks to other reports about the subject, and the connection between Awlaki and al-Qaeda