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.
Sunday, April 3, 2016
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.
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.
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?
What Is To Be Done
Location
Resources Required
Date Completed
Post-Completion Changes
None so far
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
Section 3 - The Legal Argument
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?
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.
- 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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)