So in continuance of what we discussed in length in class today, why not delve into gun control a little more? The authors of the articles I found did a really great job staying unbiased and factual on what tends to slip into a very controversial issue, and in turn, a political argument.
Here are the two articles I’m using. May as well at least skim those to get an idea of what I’m talking about! You can access both in the political section of The New York Times, as well, if these links won’t cooperate with you.
Let me start by saying, we all have our opinions on Gun Control as a topic. We all have led different lives, grown up with different ideology, and have differing stances. I think this was very apparent in class today. I made my point that my belief is that the issue is not centered on guns, it is centered on our society, and the behavior we’ve allowed as a nation to take place. This is where the issue is. To restate, in my opinion, “Guns don’t kill people, people do.”
It’s like saying a fork makes you fat. No.
Now, to address the journalism aspects of it and get off my soapbox. These articles do an excellent job considering the controversy surrounding the issues at presenting readers, generally, with facts of what is going on within their government. Rather than taking the approach of weighing the merits of the ideology, they have chosen to present the facts as they see them. This is most apparent in the second page of the first article, where the authors spend time giving insight into where both sides are likely to fall, and the complications that will arise for each. This makes the article less about who is “right” or “wrong,” and more about what is actually going on, and how this is likely to play out.
Granted, this is all part of journalism. These articles, for covering such a complex issue, do a good job stripping it to the basics. The assumption, I would guess, is that many are already at least slightly educated on the issue. However, these articles are comprehensive even if one is not. They don’t spend time in the arguments, nor do they spend time with useless writing. They get to the point, and explain, and remain unbiased.
I would argue they’ve achieved what most journalists strive for. I think this sort of thing should be very, very appreciated in the world of politics considering the impacts it can have on, well, our whole nation. We read. We vote. We even soapbox in blogs. So… it is more than appreciated when journalists stick to their professionalism, and cover the facts, and are as accurate as they can be… with no bias.