I think this is good journalism, it is very informative. Although it does not only concentrate on South America, it is mention. Women are paid less than man, This happens to be a global thing. For instance, in the country that is in South America Brazil, and Mexico. "Women in Brazil are worst off in relation to their male colleagues, at 38.5%, followed by Mexico at 33.5%."
I think this is okay journalism. I think the author could have gone a little more in depth and explained things better. Going to the human rights topic, it would have been nice, to know why Columbia is the nations with the worst human rights.
I think this is quality journalism, it's pretty well insightful, it's hard to find an article where it talks about exactly what you want, specifically education in this case.
Like many articles that I've read, there are a lot of acronyms that sometimes I don't understand, maybe if the author specifies what the are at least the first time, just to make the reading a little easier.
I think this is in fact good journalism, I think that there is too much information thrown all at once, to understand right away, maybe if you read it very carefully, you'll understand whats going on. I also think that in order to understand this you would have to somewhat know what is it that is going on.
I don't think this is great journalism. I think it should go more in depth on the issues they discussed. I think that for the most part this is promoting the photographer. "... help provide them with better access to healthcare and education." I am interested in reading on how this question is going to get answered, how are they going to help.
The Amnesty International arrested peaceful protesters. It explores a lot of issues with this topic but it doesn't go in to much depth. It feels a little repetitious, it talks about the arrest but it really doesn't say much about it.
I thought I'd be reading more about what is going on with the trade in the Middle East. Although I learned some new things, for instance, that the Japan has 3/4 of the bluefin population. Also, I think it's interesting, because I never really thought about government being involved with fishes, I guess what I am trying to say is that it's interesting because when one thinks about fish, we don't think about government, but in this case trade is involved.
I think this is somewhat informative, the author explains some of the issues. The fact that there were so many acronyms I didn't know kind of confused me a little bit but then I figured it all out. I also think that what they are doing (increasing business and partnership) is great. opportunities)
I think this is really good journalism. It gives many facts and it is pretty easy to understand. The author uses numbers and the information he gives is pretty interesting and informative.
I think the information given in this article is very insightful. Although it is a little hard to understand exactly what they are talking about and what it means, I think it's a good article. What I understood from this was that The United Kingdom is short on energy and they are creating or want to create a plant and although it sounds like a good idea it can be very harmful to the environment, so it's a win lose situation.
I think this is very informative. The reading goes very in depth. I like that it was able to give out a lot of information in a way that wasn't too much to read or a lot of information at once. I personally think this is good data.