This is a very informative piece of journalism, with all of the necessary elements. It tells the reader the basics of what happened, provides what evidence exists of why, relays reactions to the news as well as speculation on how the countries involved will proceed– all with reliable, diverse sourcing. It is not a work of literary genius in terms of the writing, but it has all the necessary pieces of good journalism. It is easy to read, and even includes other multi-media aspects like video and graphics that provide further information on the crash.
Hannah Martin
Member (since April 2010)I am a journalism student at Northeastern University. I periodically write for the Living/Arts section of the Boston Globe, Fashion Boston and will begin an internship at Vogue magazine in July.
This profile can be seen by everyone, including search engines.
This story is very relevant, and an extremely interesting. It succeeded at providing adequate context, for the issue in question, however I felt that, in terms of sourcing, this piece was quite one-sided, with Wilkerson as the only real voice. I expect this was because the other side declined to comment. Regardless, I would have liked to see at least one or two additional voices to add dimension to the piece. Also- the piece cites a document in the lede that isn't addressed in the body of the story- it is somewhat unclear what this document said exactly. If they're going to bring this document up as a form of 'evidence' I would like to see it quoted or at least know a bit more about what it said.
This is a quality piece of journalism. There is a huge amount of context given for the story, which is something that I often find lacking in news stories that just want to get out the latest info. Links are also used effectively to add more context if the reader desires. There is adequate and informative sourcing, though I do wish more interviews were conducted by the news source itself- there were a lot of references to other articles- but I suppose that is the nature of consortiumnews.com. But all-in-all I think the piece did a good job of gathering voices from each side of the issue and presenting them in a way that made the story easy-to-read, allowing the reader to see both sides of the issue and draw his or her own conclusions.
In terms of adding a human element to the story of healthcare, this piece succeeds, however, it really does little in terms of telling the news story at large.



