http://www.ktvu.com/news/18261602/detail.html
This article is about a high school in San Jose, California that had recently had all of their sports teams cut due to economic problems. As I read this article, I felt that the author added his own bias by only adding quotes that opposed the cuts. Out of the six quotes in this article, all of them are from parents, teachers, or students saying how disappointed they were in the cuts. The author briefly mentions that if the town cuts sports, then there will be less cuts in the actual classroom. If i was writing this article I would have added quotes from outsiders who understand that more cuts in extra-curricular programs means less cuts for education.
I can undertand having a few quotes opposing the cuts, and a few quotes supporting the cuts, but this author didn't do that. One quote that was added to the article was "I can't understand how we would take something so valuable as athletics from these youngsters. So I ask the board to reconsider. Shame on the people that are responsible for even bringing this up tonight. Shame on you! Shame, shame, shame!" I felt like this quote could be percieved as a personal attack, I can understand that the people in the town are upset but that quote is a little extreme!
4 comments:
Two points.
Yes, many of the quotes were one sided. However, I think that the last one- the quote from the father that's on the school board- was a useful insight. It might not have been enough to equally represent both sides, but at least it shows an attempt.
And about the quote you brought out in your blog post...that is a personal attack, but it's the football coach's attack on the board, not the writer of the article's attack. Clearly, the coach was upset that his job (and probably his greatest interest in life) is going to be pulled from his grasp at a moments notice.
I feel like this article was a poor attempt at skilled journalism with its 'crushing blows' etc etc. The writer clearly attempted to sound skilled and steer the reader in one way or the other, and it was an obvious attempt. This is why I try to stay with the NY Times because I feel like its not as bias.
I agree that pretty much all of the quotes in the article are opposed to the cut and thus creates some bias in the article. The quote at the end is definately interesting and valuable but I do feel that the author should have included more quotes from people who are for the cuts, particulary from people not directly involved in the decision.
The quote that you highlighted in your post definately seemed extreme to me, but I think that it was ok for the author to include it in the article as, like someone else pointed out, it was an attack by the coach not the journalist. However, I do think that the author needed some other pro decision quotes to balance this very memorable and stand out quote.
Yes, this article was not written well but, maybe he was trying to get a point across.
From an athletes point of view, cutting out atheltes would devestate me. Some people have different hobbies and activites they do, and just saying "alright, well just take away all sports, is unfair." Think about NHS sports for a second, how many students are on the indoor track team. The answer is over a hundred. Then add all the students who play soccer, basketball, ect. It adds up to a large amount of students. Cutting out sports at Newtown would greatly affect the school.
If you do not play a sport, you may or may not realize that sports give you an opportunity at a free education for college by a scholarship. All these quotes could be trying to get that point across. Cutting out sports if changing student-athletes futures.
Post a Comment