Have you ever really enjoyed watching the news on TV or reading the newspaper? All that news is not always that important to what you think it is. Yes, it is justifiable that thinking critically about the news has never been more important because the news could be erroneous, anyone could post on social media, and all news is not the same. To begin with, I think that we should think more critically about the news because news can be erroneous. According to the article, "Fact Check", in 1948 after the election, The Chicago Daily Tribune famously announced that Thomas Dewey had won over Harry Truman. I remember once in our local "Oldsmar Updates" showed that my neighbor, Addyson(not the best person), won the 2nd place state gymnastics instead of 1st. That makes me think that newspaper article editors should pay more attention to what they deliver to the world because it could spread as fast as the world's fastest cheetah. Khadija Qanoongo believed every single article and everything she read online was true. WOW!!!People are so
…show more content…
According to the article, Allan Miller says that a story will never become viral unless it meets a "different , stricter set of standards". I infer that knowing what the source and information verified is like a key to an enchanted door. Nevertheless, if an author does not include both sides(the "ups" and "downs"), it is a persuasive article. If one article is a judgment article and the other includes both sides, the news is not "created equal". I have read several articles all about the same topic before except they all had different perspectives. The different perspectives change what everyone sees. Finally, Persuasive articles are not 100% correct. That makes me wonder if the government should pass a law declaring everyone who rights persuasive articles should write that with the article so citizens and readers will know and be one step
According to the article, Allan Miller says that a story will never become viral unless it meets a "different , stricter set of standards". I infer that knowing what the source and information verified is like a key to an enchanted door. Nevertheless, if an author does not include both sides(the "ups" and "downs"), it is a persuasive article. If one article is a judgment article and the other includes both sides, the news is not "created equal". I have read several articles all about the same topic before except they all had different perspectives. The different perspectives change what everyone sees. Finally, Persuasive articles are not 100% correct. That makes me wonder if the government should pass a law declaring everyone who rights persuasive articles should write that with the article so citizens and readers will know and be one step