Please Do Now:
- Read the following two sports opinion articles from the Yale Daily News:
- http://www.yaledailynews.com/articles/view/27022
- http://www.yaledailynews.com/articles/view/27280
- The second writer seems to be almost directly criticizing the first. What side of the debate do you agree with? Why? What from the first piece constitutes valuable reporting or interesting writing? What is not valuable? Same for the second piece.
Today, students will:
- Peer edit first drafts.
- Conduct addtional reporting.
- Begin second drafts.
Tonight’s homework is:
- Second drafts due Tuesday.
15 responses so far ↓
patrickquinlan // January 30, 2009 at 6:06 pm |
I liked both stories, because while I think that it is important for a school newspaper to cover its own school sports, I greatly enjoyed the bashing of Bostonian Sports Fans. In the first piece, some newsworthy information would be the comparing of Bostonian championship teams and their attendance numbers with other concurrent championship teams and their respective numbers. In the second article, there wasn’t too much newsworthy information, except that the author had quite the softball team and joined both the paper and volleyball team.
biancac2010 // January 30, 2009 at 6:08 pm |
I agree with both of the articles. Although i am no sports fan myself, i believe that Karan Arakotaram, the writer of the first articles, has the right to voice his opinion. His words were very harsh yet distinct, they showed his voice completely. I like the way Arakotaram uses the words “schadenfreude,” in opening the article, and “disgusting” after discussing Boston’s wins in almost every sport championship. In the second article, the mood was completely different. Tracy Timm, the writer, was more formal in discussing her opinions. Although she had a good amount of support, her voice did not stand out as much as Arakotaram’s did. I enjoyed the first article more because i found it to be more amusing, it definitely left a smirk on my face.
xkatastrophe // January 30, 2009 at 6:08 pm |
I agree with the side of the first article, not because I know about anything he’s saying (do not follow sports) but because his piece had passion and humor. I loved the beanie baby comparison! He used strong words to get his point across, such as “Disgusting.” after going over his rival teams stats for the season. The article starts humourously by defining the word that means taking pleasure in someone elses’ misfortune, which perfectly describes the tone of the article. It was interesting, entertaining, had game stats and facts and I found it to be a very good piece of journalism. The second one I have no respect for because it has no value. It was just some womans life story, and I could have honestly cared less. It sounded more like a diary entry than an article.
laurenpeterson1 // January 30, 2009 at 6:10 pm |
I like sports yet I found both of these uninteresting. The reasons being that both are extremely opinionated and are biased. The first simply bashes all of Boston’s Sports teams, and although it provided interesting information such as that the 3 teams almost won in their divisions, it was annoying to read the same opinion over and over again. The second article was a little better, yet Timms wrote only about the sports at Yale. It was interesting up until the point where he started saying that he considers himself to be an athlete, even though he doesn’t participate in them any longer. I’m unsure of the type of people who actually lie reading things like this, but I am NOT one of them.
hkramer14 // January 30, 2009 at 6:10 pm |
I found these stories uninteresting, as they seemed biased. The first news story has more news-ish quality to it while the second one seems more opiniated and dealing with the writer’s personal interest (she had a knick for softball, volleyball, and writing for her school’s paper). The first story seemed to expand the sports direction, veering towards bashing Boston. The second article’s author stayed within her school.
alicel2011 // January 30, 2009 at 6:11 pm |
I loked the first article better. What the author is saying is totaly true. Boston’s team does have a lot of players even tough it may not win a lot of games. Everything that he is saying is somewhat true he packs it up very well.From the first piece some valuable information would be the the history of the Boston REd Soxs last year.
yamileyl2009 // January 30, 2009 at 6:11 pm |
Both articles are interesting and valuable in their own way. However, I liked the first one better because of the dynamic diction and witiful tone. The second one was more like reading a teenage girl’s journal. At times it became boring and dull.
7y13r // January 30, 2009 at 6:11 pm |
I agree more with the second article’s side. The first article was filled with how disappointed the author was with his favorite teams and how happy he was that his least favorite team fails. He lacked any real enthusiasm for the game.
gwenxawesome // January 30, 2009 at 6:11 pm |
The first article clearly lets everyone know his point of view on what he thought.
I thought the artilce had such an interesting tone to it, that I felt like the author was actually talking to me.
It was definetely not a bore to read like most sports articles, just when I thought I was about to loose focus in the article, something would pop up. As for the second article, I thought it had a more “proffesional” tone, it wasnt
madisonjsanders // January 30, 2009 at 6:15 pm |
I agree with the second writer in the sense that even though fans want to stay updated with their favorite teams, sport stories aren’t as exciting anymore because they lack wit and excitement. The first piece just goes on to talk about Boston and it’s successful sports seasons in the usual manner, as explained by the second writer.
RayL2012 // January 30, 2009 at 6:17 pm |
I liked both stories. I found the first story to be very agressive. However i found it intersting that you dont really know what side the author is on. He could be someone who hates the Red Socks with all of his soul, or he could be an original loyal fan who is displeased that everyone is becominig a Red Socks because the red socks are winning. In the second story i found that it was interesting to have somewhat of a journal from an athleate with her experience.
brittanywaserstein // January 30, 2009 at 6:19 pm |
I agree with the first article because it was more interesting and i think readers would be more interested in this article then the second one. The first article had strong opinions, passion and a good point of view. I agree with the second article’s point of view but i dont think they expressed it in the right way.
lenac2011 // January 30, 2009 at 6:26 pm |
The second writer says that if you are an athlete, you should support other athletes, no matter what. The first writer says that he is ashamed to be having to support certain sports teams. I agree with the second writer because, as an athlete, it takes a lot of work and determination to be an athlete and everyone goes through the same hard process of getting good and become successfull. The first writer says a lot of statistics and why people are following the specific team. The second writer uses more of a journal entry format for the article and not much actual information.
jessicaw2010 // January 30, 2009 at 6:28 pm |
I personally liked the first article better because it caught my interest. Usually when I read sports stories I get lost in concentration because I get easily bored. It had a straightforward tone, which made me feel as if the author was speaking directly to me. The second article was a sports article written as a news story. I found this article to be less interesting.
nadineg2012 // February 1, 2009 at 4:20 pm |
*I’m sorry this is late. I forgot to submit it during class.
The first article from the Yale Daily News is about national sports, not college sports, or even national teams near the college. However, the author is presenting a unique point of view using literary devices, which make it interesting to read despite its lack of nearness. He also uses several relevant and interesting statistics.
The second article is almost criticizing the first in that it expresses the opinion that the college paper should cover the college’s sports teams more often. This article reads almost like a diary entry, which is a big journalistic no-no.
I don’t agree or disagree with either side of the argument. I think that most students want to know about both school and national sports. Also, if an article about a national team can be interesting enough to capture the attention of someone who knows nothing about sports (like me :]), then why not print it? As the second article demonstrates, just because an article is about local sports doesn’t mean that it is worth printing.