Is the Government the Nation's Biggest Criminal?

Published on October 23, 2013, New York Times' contributing opinion writer and longtime Wall Street executive, Steven Rattner wrote the article "The Biggest Economy Killer: Our Government."

The article was written in the appeal of pathos and logos. Rattner passionately wrote about how the government shutdown was the most irresponsible decision the government has made. He uses many examples so his audience could relate to the matter and have a better understanding of the issue. He uses big numbers and precise percentages in his writing, without euphemising anything. The article contains numerous factual evidence following the shutdown. 

Not only did Rattner successfully inform his readers, but he also provided solutions. His article was very informative and did not lack professionalism. The graphs provided the audience with visuals that may have been easier to understand than his technical terms in the writing itself. One reason why his work was enjoyable to read is because he keeps a balanced mindset and does not harshly antagonize one side.

 "In overall spending, the lack of a thoughtful budgeting process in Congress has shifted priorities in unfortunate ways."

This article was very well written, provided facts and solutions to how it could have been handled differently. It also persuaded his audience to rethink about what the government is doing to our own economy.  

Mass Murderers & National Security Leakers

On Sunday, September 29, 2013, a USA Today journalist published an opinionated argument article, "Security clearance flaws: Our view". The article explains the similarities that Aaron Alexis, mass murderer, and Edward Snowden, national security secrets leaker, had in common: national security clearance.

The author does an excellent job of "digging" up the unknown information about the two men to inform the audience that they should be upset with the government. They note many major flaws that are towards Alexis' credibility. I enjoyed reading this article not only because I agree with the author, but also because the author kept their audience informed. The opinion was clear from the very beginning and was not biased. Many journalist cannot be one sided because of the audience, whom varies in opinions. However, this author felt that their views needed to be shared in a powerful way.

The only problem that I had with this article was that it might have been not as relatable to the audience. It lacked examples of the problem. Instead, everything was implied, which is dangerous when explaining an argument. They carry a plethora of information and comparisons, but does not go into detail about each example. Towards the end of the work many instances were named and left unexplained. For example, "Since the Navy Yard shootings, officials in many of the agencies involved have scurried to investigate and promise reforms."  This statement was very vague and did not flow with the rest of the article. 

Overall, the article had many flaws, but also many well-written moments. The author did intensive research over the argument and influenced many about it was published. I enjoyed critiquing the author's work.