This article has a lot of information packed into a lengthy piece of writing. However, despite the lengthiness of it, I have trouble identifying the main point of the article. Obviously, the piece is about the Virginia gubernatorial election. After reading the whole article and trying to follow the author’s points, I still cannot determine what specifically happened right now to make this newsworthy. I understand what is happening in Virginia, but the writer goes on for many paragraphs and, as a reader, I expected them to all come together and make sense at some point. I did not get this moment of sudden clarity. It feels like the writer just listed a lot of information related to the unconventional election without any flow to the writing. Overall, I was confused. Additionally, the sentences often contained very complicated structure, with multiple clauses jumbled together, making it even more difficult to understand. Aside from the confusion that I felt the article created, I also noticed a few other qualities of this article. Every time President Trump is mentioned, the author either simply says “the president” or calls him “Mr. Trump.” When mentioning our most recent former president, though, the writer calls him the proper “former President Barack Obama.” I do not think this was a careless mistake. Even if it was, that is not acceptable for such a highly respected publication. I believe the writer purposefully refuses to call Trump by his title. This is a common situation as of late, with many saying “not my president” and related remarks. As a professional journalist delivering news to the public, though, politics should not influence writing. The writer may not agree with Trump’s politics, but he is currently our president and I believe this deserves the same treatment as any title receives. The author is using this sly component to make a point, but it is inappropriate for a news article.
In my opinion, this article does a good job of telling two stories simultaneously. The newsworthy topic of the article is the donation of campaign contributions to take a stand. The background information of why they are doing so needs to be explained in the article for the sake of clarity and the writer does an excellent job of talking about the whole picture without the headline getting lost in the mix.
This article is informative, but the headline is somewhat misleading. I was expecting the article to be about either Warren or Sanders. However, it was about both of them (and even more). The vague idea that “one takes a road more traveled” does not seem to fit into the article and that threw me a bit for a loop as I started reading.