Week Three

Where Business Fits into Art

For last week’s blog post, I went a little bit broad. I started to discuss the movie industry as a whole, but I’ll shrink it down a bit this week and discuss it as a business. I think it’s important to remember that the movie industry is still a business. I know that I, personally, love to see the bright lights at the movie theater and think about all of the magic made behind the scenes and the worlds I might be taken to when watching the latest releases, but there’s some guy in a $6,000 suit somewhere with those thoughts incredibly far from his priority list.

First, I found this article from Deadline explaining how Oscar nominations impacted nominated films at the box office. Though there are definitely opinions inserted throughout the article, I absolutely believe that this is a news  story. It draws conclusions from the numbers it sees, but I truly believe that it makes completely logical conclusions in terms of causation because of correlation. For example, it explains that films nominated for Best Picture actually saw jumps in their domestic box office totals over the course of one weekend, which, in my experience, is mostly unheard of outside of awards season. It’s a great news story to show the relevance of the Oscars and how they impact the business of film. I also trust Deadline because they, along with places like Variety and The Hollywood Reporter, have spent decades earning their credibility. These outlets can be seen by some as the New York Times of entertainment news, and they’ve established trust with their readers. They also use data to illustrate their points. The data derives from official box office totals, and it’s presented clearly without seeming to misrepresent what is actually happening.

Next is this article, again from Deadline, about this weekend’s box office projections. This one seems to be very straightforward in its intentions to inform. It is simply discussing box office totals, which show how successful a movie is each weekend. I also like that this article informs us of the budget of films, which is important to contextualize the box office return. It explains that The Rhythm Section, a new film starring Blake Lively, is projected to finish with a box office total of $3.1 million. It’s pretty easy to understand why that’s bad when the article also explains that the movie had a production budget of $50 million, which doesn’t even count marketing expenses. This article even explains the demographics of ticket buyers, complete with percentages, and it reports facts about what critics say. It never explicitly mentions opinions on the films, but it certainly leads us to conclusions about how to interpret the data, and the data suggests that The Rhythm Section is a big flop considering it will come in tied with Little Women for 8th place this weekend, a movie in its 6th week of release. Having read both news articles I’ve talked about I can conclude that Little Women might be able to keep up with The Rhythm Section’s opening weekend total because of Oscar nominations, so going deeper into news is obviously helpful. Again, Deadline is very reliable, but I also believe these totals because it is simple data collected by official box office counts. There’s not really a reason for me to be skeptical about this, and Deadline isn’t showing any bias by showing numbers and contextualizing those numbers.

In terms of opinions, I went back to 2009 for this review from Time’s Mary Pols on the movie Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen. Obviously this is an opinion piece, as it’s a review, but any time the writer describes something as a “play date from hell,” I think it can be interpreted as subjective. I’ve seen the movie, and she’s exactly right, but it’s still an opinion. She even discusses her experience with the Transformers franchise anecdotally by placing herself inside the article and explaining that she missed the first film in the franchise, which she considers a blessing. I think any time the writer places themselves into a story or an article and expresses his or her viewpoint regarding the subject of that article, it’s an opinion. I love opinions, but they’re definitely meant to be taken in stride. Even critics I’ve connected with over the years oftentimes have different opinions regarding certain movies than I do, but I enter reviews and editorials knowing that. As far as the credibility of this article, I think Time is credible. The only thing I might be skeptical about is whether or not this critic actually saw the movie. Until I have proof, a la Entertainment Weekly’s review of Netflix’s The Witcher, that the critic did not watch something, I believe she watched it. Unfortunately, it would only take one slip to make me refuse to trust her in the future, but when I’m only counting on her to watch a movie, I’d consider myself to be in safe hands.

Finally, I thought I’d take a deeper look at the Transformers franchise with this article from Polygon titled, “How does a ‘terrible’ movie make $300 million in three days?” Right off the bat, I know that this is an opinion. It is from 2014 and comments on the success of Transformers: Age of Extinction, a movie that currently sits at 18% on Rotten Tomatoes, yet somehow managed to make $300 million worldwide in its opening weekend. The article goes on to give the typical criticisms of a Michael Bay movie: no plot, dumb explosions, flat females and robots that embody racial stereotypes for some reason. These are all observations, but they are also, by definition, opinions. Even according to the Rotten Tomatoes scale that gives a black-and-white, yes-or-no response, 18% of critics liked the movie, so who’s right? We’ll never truly know, because these opinions can’t be proven. I had honestly never even heard of Polygon prior to this assignment, but it seems to be reputable for what it’s doing with this article. This is just an opinionated analysis of a business trend in movies. That said, I probably won’t be visiting Polygon again because my screen was riddled with ads the second I opened it, and I was attacked with the spinning wheel of death as my computer tried to load them all, but for a one time read, I’m willing to indulge the writer and listen to his opinion.

Photo Credit to Paramount Pictures for use of images

Week Three

Climate Crisis – News vs. Opinion

With raging forest fires in Australia, shrinking glaciers, and rising sea levels, it is obvious there is an anomaly with our planet’s climate. With climate change being such a large topic, there are hundreds of articles being released each week discussing the crisis at hand. 

With so many daily news articles covering the climate crisis and its stigma, it is safe to say people are discussing the topic regularly. A great news article to read into for information is, ‘Ignore the Fake Climate Debate‘. This article covers the debate between alarmists and deniers discussing the climate debate and the relationship between human’s emissions of greenhouse gasses and warming climate. This article comes from a very reputable source known widely across the world as, The Wall Street Journal. Its author, Ted Nordhaus, is the founder and executive director of The Breakthrough Institute. The Breakthrough Institute is known for their global research that identifies technological solutions to human and environmental development challenges. With all this information, I would source this article as credible news. Not only does Mr. Nordhaus cite and offer both qualitative and quantitative data, he is considered to be an expert regarding climate crisis. Another great article is ‘The signal of human-caused climate change‘ written by Andrew Freedman, published in The Washington Post. Freedman goes in depth about human induced climate change in daily weather on a global scale. Furthermore, he cites his information from research facilities and institutions across the world. Freedman proves himself with his fine reputation on The Washington Post as an editor focusing solely on extreme weather, climate change, science, and the environment. All of the information combined leads me to believe that this news article can be trusted and is a credible source.

Within the news, you can always find opinion articles to either encourage or refute a topic. When it comes to the climate crisis the most prominent refuting opinions include the problem not existing, it not affecting us, or that it is entirely made up. Coverage on topics such as, ‘Climate change: just another political controversy’ can be easily identified as opinion news. This article can be found on the Astorian, a news website for people in or around the Oregon area. Author Don Haskell is a retired attorney and former commissioner for Clatsop County. This article goes in depth about the controversy of whether humans’ use of fossil fuels and other natural resources affects earth’s weather cycles. It is argued that climate change is not a scientific endeavor, but just one big political controversy funded with government money. The entirety of this article is based on the author’s opinions regarding the climate crisis. And while Haskell is not an expert within the climate crisis field, being a commissioner within Clatsop County holds some weight. While this article holds much information regarding why Haskell believes what he does, this article is not credible due to lack of citations and expert knowledge from the author. Another article of climate change opinion is ‘What Trump and Mnuchin understand‘ by Yanis Varoufakis, found on MarketWatch. He goes into detail on why he believes Greta Thunberg knows nothing real when it comes to the climate crisis and how he believes neither a climate or economic crisis is possible. While Varoufakis is known as the former finance minister of Greece and professor of economics at the University of Athens, his knowledge about the environment is lacking. The article is solely based on his knowledge of economics but his opinion regarding the climate crisis, results in a semi-credible opinion news article.

With so many news articles out on the internet covering just the climate crisis, it is easy to get confused between credible and non-credible sources along with actual news versus opinion news. By simply looking into the author, you can find their expertise, then look into the sources cited and you be the judge of whether or not you have a credible news article. Happy reading!

Week Three

The New World with…. OnlyFans

Something that captured my attention a couple of years ago was the mysterious and magical world of Camming. Some of my guy friends brought up the issues with Twitch, they were cracking down on girls for what they were wearing, and how such girls should move to MyFreeCams. This is a ‘cam’site this means models get on a webcam and stream to the site MyFreeCams where people, typically men, can find them. Don’t get me wrong there is a huge difference between MFC or MyFreeCams and Twitch, that is because MFC is seen as a pornographic website.

There are many issues with this and the site, mostly that they categorized an entire gender and although not all girls cam from Twitch many did because they felt that’s where they had to go, because of this I had to learn more. Although MFC was salvation from Twitch MFC posed their own issues, there were inherently a pornsite, although some of these girls had no desire to undress many get pressured into it. This all being said MFC is a great site that encourages women to be creative and do whatever makes them happy.

The reason a state all of this for background for OnlyFans; OnlyFans is considered like MFC to be a Pornsite/ app. This being said many creators for MFC have chosen to switch over to OnlyFans, Why? How is OnlyFans changing the way porn is?

NYTimes dives into why OnlyFans has changed sex work possibly forever. Although NYTimes in the article covers the backstories of sex workers from different fields, it shares little opinion on it more stating it as a documentary than a sided point of view. He interviews different kinds of models and how they came to use only fans, how much they make, and how it has helped them personally, making this a new item. It seems to be a credible article because of it being from a credible well know source but also the links he puts to all the people he interviewed, although there was no sources for the sums of money he stated.

PinkNews attempts to explain what OnlyFans is. They quickly go into the process of how to sign up after mentioning who might be on there, “…technically it’s a general app and not exclusive to people who work in porn. It’s also used by fitness bloggers, dieticians and more.” it doesn’t cover more than that. It goes on to state how much of a pay cut OnlyFans takes, how often content makers get paid without any proof linking what there saying to the website. The last section of the article is what makes is an opinion based article, where they weight the ethics of having a porn app and whether it’s good for the world. This is a UK based website so it might be more credible over there, but to me, it seemed like a gossip blog that had done minimum research and didn’t bother to credit the resources making it unreliable.

CNBC goes into a broader article taking about OnlyFans, Fancentric, and Snapchat but all information pertains to OnlyFans. They explain how the site works and benefits creators through Dolly, and a girl who just started on OnlyFans, diving deeper the explain how subscriptions make up the app. Next is how this has changed drastically from how they were 10 years ago and have to make a creator’s life drastically easier. Especially because of the money increase in the industry, it has quickly become a Billion dollar industry, as implied by CNBC. The wrap up the article with there concerns for the use of Snapchat and how it is still in the center of the part of the sex industry although it isn’t allowed on the app and is expressly prohibited. This is a new article that is reviewing the reality of these porn apps and what it might be like for a creator and has links to everything imaginable making it a credible source.

Lastly OnlyFans,  this is an article from the OnlyFans blog taking about techniques to launch your OnlyFans correctly, this is a complete opinion based article and they let that be known, “We recommend you place your OnlyFans profile link in the “About” fields of your social media profiles, share posts via Twitter or advertise your OnlyFans page anywhere you have followers.” This is simply an article on recommendations they have for a new user and how their tips could help them. They start by advising you to prepare, explaining that this too requires work, next they establish that you need to know whether your following will use OnlyFans and start bringing them over, and lastly they explain the importance of being flexible especially when it comes to your pricing. These just being tips it’s hard to say whether it’s credible or not, they could be and could not be.


Week Three

Module 3:News & Opinions on Racism in the Fashion Industry

There is a difference between actual news and opinion pieces. This Washington Post article is a great example of opinion. We know it’s an opinion piece because it is labeled as such but also it’s very clear from the headline itself. It poses a question that could potentially have many answers. It could even have an answer differing from the one in the article. “Why the fashion industry keeps bumbling into racist imagery” is a really great topic posed by the headline of this article. The only way to answer however is to give an opinion not a fact as there is no one real answer. There are plenty of facts presented throughout the article but at the end of the day when the author revisits the headline question they are stating their opinion. The Washington post is a very well known news organization. It is very credible when it comes to news but this is an opinion piece so the credibility is not really there. USA today also has this problem. In an article about what fashions most controversial designs are, the writing is a matter of opinion not news.  What is controversial to one person might not be controversial to another. I would not say USA Today is a credible news source. Most of what is written about has nothing to do with news. The news articles that are available are generally about politics and no other subject except health. This lead me to believe that the primary writing that USA Today does is opinion pieces.

The New York Times published an article about a couple of brands thats released racist products and apologized. This article presents the facts simply and gives no opinions on the matter. It even says “products criticized as racist” instead of calling the products racist. By doing this it separates itself from an opinion article because something can be racists or not depending on how you ask. Whereas in the articles previously mentioned in the titles as well as the articles it presented opinions outright. The Times article is attempting to stay neutral. I find the New York Times to be a very credible source of news. Not only do they cover news on many subjects but they present facts while staying neutral.  The final article we will talk about is one from GQ. I liked this article because it reminded me of the New York Times article. The fact were simply laid out and the tone was neutral. It explained why Dapper Dan is helping Gucci with their branding after some racist missteps the brand had experienced. Overall I really enjoyed this article and was surprised as it is probably the first article I’ve read from GQ. GQ is a printed magazine and they also have their articles online. A lot of what they do is opinion pieces but there are articles like this sprinkled in. I don’t think GQ is a credible news source because most of what they do is opinion driven and not neutral, at least that’s what I gathered from their website. It is possible that the magazine is different.

With all of that being said it’s important to challenge our views of what is credible or not and why we feel that way. Some people don’t see the New York Times as credible in the way that I do. Maybe they read USA Today or GQ instead and find those to be equally as credible. We must acknowledge these disagreements, with a grain of salt, to better understand one another. Be sure to open your mind and ask your own questions.

Week Three

News & Opinion

This week our focus is surrounding the difference between news and opinion. Regarding movie and TV show reviews, majority of the content available on the web discussing new productions’ releases would be considered opinion. This is because each and every viewer will view the same TV show episode or movie differently due to their own personal experiences, thoughts, preferences, and biases. However, there are lots of articles that can be considered news worthy about the entertainment industry, they’re just more difficult to find. So, lets dive right into that process.

“Disney’s Frozen Receives Price Drop on Xbox Video” by BagoGames is licensed under CC BY 2.0

First, lets head back to 2013 to discuss the release of the “top-grossing animated film of all time” at that time – Frozen (hollywoodreporter). According to the Hollywood Reporter, the release of the musical tale Frozen back in 2013 broke records after earning $1.28 billion globally. Breaking records such as being the top-grossing animated film of all time is definitely considered to be news worthy. The numbers earned from the release of the film Frozen could not lie and therefore, neither could the Hollywood Reporter. Flash forward to November of 2019, Frozen 2 broke seven records within its first week of being released. Anna and Elsa’s second adventure wrangled in over $358 million worldwide in only seven days (hollywoodreporter). And after only one month in theaters, the movie had “nabbed over $700 million worldwide” (forbes). These outstanding numbers speak for themselves by saying that Frozen 2 is an exceptional movie that deserves the public’s views. However, thats not what all the reporters were saying about the film.

Erik Kain for Forbes wrote an article discussing the “5 biggest problems with Disney’s disappointing sequel.” According to Kain, Frozen 2 had too many fundamental problems with the story to be considered worthwhile. With problems from its mess of a plot to its unmemorable music, Kain’s opinion of Frozen 2 is not a good one (forbes). Although Kain’s arguments have some stance to them, I’m not sure his personal opinion has a greater stance than the undeniable monetary revenue that the film had received. So in this case, with the Hollywood Reporter’s facts as backing, Frozen 2 is worth the watch regardless of Kain’s less than satisfactory report. Although both articles stem from credible news outlets, in my opinion, why would a middle-aged man’s opinion about an animated film made for kids warrant any power anyhow?

“AVENGERS ENDGAME | unofficial artwork” by PL Boucher is licensed under CC BY-NC-ND 4.0

Another recently successful Disney movie was Avengers: Endgame. The capstone to the 22 movie Marvel universe was, and still is, a very highly rated film. The 2009 movie Avatar had held a 10-year reign as the biggest box office champion until the release of Avengers: Endgame in April of 2019 (variety). After one weekend in theaters, only two days, Avengers: Endgame crossed $2.79 billion at the global box office (variety). Until then, the highest grossed global box office record was held by Avatar after receiving $2.78 billion within its first weekend (variety). After beating out a 10-year hold on a global box office record, it is safe to assume that Avengers: Endgame is a great movie, right? Well, according to many top critic reporters, yes!

Matthew Norman for Evening Standard, Go London reviewed Avengers: Endgame only six days after its release. “The only complaint about Avengers: Endgame is that it raises the bar so high that there may well never be a superhero movie to match it” (evening standard). Like Norman, so many others reported positive reviews about the final movie. With opinion and fact backing this film, it is safe to say that it is worth a watch.

Again, movie and TV show reviews can be difficult to rely on no matter how credible the news outlet may be because really these reviews rely solely on opinion. When looking at the facts about the revenue Frozen 2 and Avengers: Endgame brought in in just their first weeks in the box office, one could conclude that the numbers prove that the movies are great and they will like it! But even then, nobody can be sure that a highly rated or highly grossed movie will be to their liking because every individual’s preferences are unique and different.

If you missed the embedded links within the article, you can find the discussed reviews here! Hollywood Reporter. Forbes. Variety. Evening Standard.

Week Three

Veganism – News and Opinion

Health comparison between an omnivore diet and a vegan diet:

While Veganuary has ended, I don’t foresee the discussion around the vegan diet ending anytime soon.  Veganuary was a pledge individuals made for the New Year, to try the vegan diet for a month.  The movement started in the UK, but became increasingly popular in the United States.

One of the larger concerns emerging in the media is whether or not the diet supports the health and wellness of humans.  Two emerging narratives are that the diet doesn’t provides enough of the essential vitamins to support the brain, while others would argue that a vegan diet could decrease BMI, cholesterol levels, and other risks.

In my research for vegan diet on health, it seemed to be in the same territory of diets in general.  In this space, I found it a little difficult to decipher news from opinion, but ultimately decided outside sources and facts to be the news, while linked opinions to be more of analysis and opinion pieces.


Vegan diet in news:

Source: BBC

When viewing the top hits on Google News I noticed some of the known news organizations advocated one way or the other.  BBC currently has one of the top articles against a vegan diet.  This article talks about what vegans are low on, but doesn’t always provide the audience with direct sources to the studies.  This article does do a better job on educating the audience about which essential vitamins do what.  I would say that this is a semi-one sided news piece on the omnivore diet, but it does provide many sources to back up some of the claims made.

Other BBC articles discussing the risks of a vegan diet are more of opinion pieces including having a  higher stroke risk or how some individuals could use the diet as a cover for an eating disorder claiming it is a more acceptable way to be restrictive.  I cite these as opinion pieces, because there are few links to outside sources, and some of the bulkier content comes from individual opinions and experiences.


Source: Good Food

Good Food is a news article that presents information about a vegan diet having negative effects on one’s health.  The article does seem to have a stance against veganism and while it doesn’t include direct links, it does cite outside sources which speaks to the credibility of this article.


Vegan diet in opinion:

Source: Insider
Initially, I wanted to believe that this article was news probably because of my own confirmation bias, but after reviewing some of the sources, I believe it is an opinion piece.  How going vegan can affect your body and brain, is an article that generally focuses on the positive aspects of adopting a vegan diet, such as weight loss, more energy, better sleep, skin improvement, and more.  This article briefly touches on the some of the negative effects of a vegan diet claiming that vegans may be deficient in some essential vitamins.  This article does link some sources, but I do not find them credible because they link to other internal Insider sources.


Source: Plant Based News

Brendyn Nyhan, professor at Dartmouth, coined the term “backfire effect.”  Backfire effect is when a person hears the opposite of their opinions or views, and step back or dig deeper into their beliefs.  After reading the BBC article, it was interesting to see this loud opinion against the article.  This piece is an analysis of the facts that were made in the BBC article, but they have a one sided view, pro veganism.  This is a semi-creedible piece as it links to few studies and other opinion pieces.


Final thoughts:

As discussed in this week’s material, it is difficult to navigate the world of science in news.  When reviewing content covering vegan diets and really diets in general, there is a lot of charged emotion feeling one way or the other, and it is important for the audience to follow the cited sources to verify the credibility.

Week Three

Two Truths and Two Lies?

Last week, I shared my fascination with the the Royal Couple Harry and Meghan.  The actual news out of the Royal Palace has slowed down, now the media must find a way to keep this subject relevant and newsworthy. Enter the opinion pieces. These pieces are front and center now as the world begins to fill the Royal Family news void with these pieces.

Looking at what was out there, the latest update today was around who could fill the gap left by Megxit as it is commonly called in the media. Vanity Fair weighed in with an article.  In it, they say including that  it is likely Princess Beatrice and Eugene may be tapped to help out with more Royal engagements. While this girls have always been on the peripheral in the Royal news coverage, they were never more than a sidebar. Now with two major players like Harry and Meghan out, the media is turning to them to garner attention. It is clearly all speculation as this time and there are a few things that would tell a reader that including:

the source-Vanity Fair is not seen as a reliable and trusted major news source. While they have published good pieces of journalism and certainly excellent photos.

their sources– all anonymous.

references- while there are many in article reference links, none go beyond quoting themselves. Failure to quote additional outside sources is a clear indication this is simply the thoughts going around Vanity Fair right now.

Some stories call out right in their title that they are opinion pieces, such as this Fox News bit about Princess Diana’s former butler’s opinion. This piece allows him to speak freely about his feelings on Megxit.  A reader could also apply the same criteria as above and see this also fails to meet the standards of unbiased news journalism.

the source– Fox News, a media company that has made its empire by catering to a conservative audience without regard to unbiased reporting.

their sources-a former butler. This guy has written a tell all and done a lot of press. He is a media whore and when you factor in the length of time he has been out of the Royal Family’s affairs (over 20 years) why would they even give him the time on air?

references– again we see a failure to quote outside reputable resources.


Going back a week in media coverage you can see where there was still news being reported. For example the BBC wrote about what is next for Harry and Meghan.  Unlike the Fox News piece above, this article would stand up as a piece of solid unbiased coverage.

the source– BBC is known around the world for their excellent reporting and is a trusted source.

their sources– several are cited including Meghan and Harry themselves. Who better to tell the world what is going on then the couple in question?

references– same as above, several articles are mentioned including outside publications showing why the BBC is a trusted news source.

Going back to when the scandal broke at the start of January i have chosen a piece that may look like opinion but is actually solid news coverage. This article looks at ways Meghan and Harry have modernized the monarchy. All 12 of these ways are clearly explained without using the writer’s own opinion but instead examples and facts.

the source– Business Insider, not known for it’s gossipy or speculative coverage of current events unless its about the latest stock tips.

their sources- meet the test of credible sources who can be named for reference.

references- this article shows that outside sources are critical when examining Harry and Meghan.

It can be hard to tell what is fact and what is opinion in today’s media cycle. Just trust that until the Royal Family themselves can be quoted, it is all speculative.

Week Three

News vs Opinion/Analysis

When the media covers the National Football League, there is a lot of content out there.  It is arguably the most popular and most watched sport in the country.  There is sometimes when the coverage is cloudy when deciding if it is news or opinion, other times it is way more clear.  Below are a few examples of the differences.


Brown finds new home, agrees to deal with Pats 

This is a very clear example of news.  When you read this story it states nothing but facts from the start saying “Antonio Brown on Saturday agreed to a deal with the New England Patriots, his agent, Drew Rosenhaus, told ESPN’s Adam Schefter.”  They then went into more detail explaining how much money  the deal is worth, if there is any incentives, guaranteed money, signing bonus and how long the deal is for. The story then goes on to say how Brown was released from the Oakland Raiders, how his guaranteed money with them was voided.  This article is full of stats about Brown, the Patriots roster and key events that happened before the signing to lead Brown to the Patriots.  The author does a good job in reporting nothing but facts.  This is the perfect example of a breaking news story.

A Clumsy Start to the 2019 NFL Season for the Packers and Bears

This article is a very informing article about the Thursday night game between the Packers and the Bears.  At the beginning of the article, it starts off explains how Adrian Amos called the play which led to his gaming winning interception.  Then the article explains how the game was sloppy for both teams.  It describes what happened in the game to a point where if you did not watch the game, you could feel like you did to a degree.  They also used a good variety of quotes from after the game which gave good insight to how the players and coaches felt about the game.  Overall, I think this was a really good news piece on the first NFL game of the season which used facts, quotes and statistics to paint a very vivid picture.


Patriots sign Antonio Brown: 8 thoughts on New England’s All-Pro addition

It is stated in the title that this is going to be an opinion story, eight thoughts on the Patriots signing Antonio Brown.  Before even reading the article, you know it will be some one tell you eight of their thoughts on the move.  For example, his number one thought is the Patriots could have one of the top wide receiver trios in modern NFL history.  He has no facts behind this statement, especially since the season has not started and these three wide receivers have not taken one snap together on the field. He uses statistics to back up his thought but that does not mean everyone agrees to this.  Later on in the article, his number seven thought was the Patriots should continue to run a spread offense.  That is clearly an opinion and does not need an explanation.

NFL Predictions 2019: Complete Playoff Picks, Super Bowl LIV Champion, Awards Winners

Here is another example of an opinion article.  This whole article is the MMQB Staff from Sports Illustrated talking about their playoff predictions, Super Bowl LIV Champions and award winners for the upcoming 2019-2020 season.  These 13 reporters go through and list their winners then use facts and statistics to back their opinion on these various topics.  Each of them have a graphic showing each team the believe will win in every round of the playoffs for both NFC and AFC.  After the list the winners of the NFL Awards, they give a detailed paragraph telling why they believe their opinion will be correct.

Week Three

News and Opinion in Vintage TV Appreciation

Is it news or is it opinion? Is an article based on nuanced fact or on personal analysis? It is an understatement that it was challenging to find articles about vintage TV’s influence that are much more than an informational history or a “top ten list.” Here, I share some of my favorite news and opinion articles that I read that center around the impact and appreciation of vintage television.

1. “We Need a TCM For Television.” – by Noel Murray, The AV Club – OPINION

It is very clear when reading this article that the author, Noel Murray and I are kindred spirits. In this item, Murray, distraught at how cable networks neglect vintage TV series, suggests the creation of a channel that reveres classic television the way that the channel Turner Classic Movies reveres older films. This article is an obvious opinion piece, especially when he goes on to describe how he would control the channel and the kinds of programs he thinks should air on it. He also expresses his personal feelings that although it is wonderful that TV in it’s current state is finally getting some respect, he believes that vintage TV should be respected just as much.

  1. “New Non-Profit Caters to Classic TV” – by Stefan Blitz, Forces of Geek – NEWS

This article features pop culture author Herbie J. Pilato’s 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization, The Classic TV Preservation Society. This charitable organization’s mission is to educate and enlighten others on the social influence and positive impact of classic TV, on the world and on people as individuals. The article quotes Pilato as he states his values and describes his educational “Classic TV and Self-Esteem” seminars. Because of the article’s informative writing style, structured word choice, and series of quotes by Pilato to support the text, this is clearly a news item.

  1. “Why Are These Classic Shows Nowhere To Be Found On Streaming?” – by Josef Adalian, Vulture – OPINION

This analytical piece describes how the economics of today’s streaming media influences which vintage TV shows are featured on streaming channels, and which ones are left out. It describes that it is all in what will attract the most subscriptions, which usually means what attracts a younger demographic, as well as music licensing rights (not vintage TV, sadly). Though there is factual evidence in this piece that support the author’s reasonings, the author has a more relaxed, “personal” style of writing, and there are subjective statements sprinkled all over the place. For example, he describes the lack of vintage programs on streaming channels as a “frustrating problem” for retro TV lovers. Another standout example is when he describes this frustration as a “first-world problem,” especially when there are so many great shows to watch already. These statements prove that this is most certainly an opinion article.

  1. “50 Years of Sunny Days on ‘Sesame Street’: Behind the Scenes of TV’s Most Influential Show Ever” – by Marisa Guthrie, The Hollywood Reporter – NEWS

This is a fantastic recent news item that highlights one particular program, Sesame Street, which, because it is celebrating its 50th anniversary this year, falls into the “vintage TV” category. This story reports on the series’ longevity and informs readers on the incredible cultural impact the series has made across the world, and how it completely changed the way that all children’s television is made. This is not a piece that is just filled with educated insight, but also with actual written history, proven facts, and quotes from the creators and actors themselves: all fantastic things that can aid in creating a great news article.

Week Three

Deaf Representation Analysis: News vs. Opinion

To begin this week’s post, I want to make sure that everyone reading this knows I am a part of the hearing community and that I am only a student learning ASL. This blog is my freedom of expression and I only wish the same for the Deaf Community as well.

This week I decided to study news or opinion/analysis articles and connect and elaborate on my previous ideas. Below I am putting two categories: news and opinion.


  1. Time USA’s, “The Society’s Sean Berdy on ASL Representation, Teen Activism and His Buzzy New Netflix Drama”

  2. NBC’s, “The Hearing World Must Stop Forcing Deaf Culture to Assimilate”
Sean Berdy (via Google Images)

When reading the first article, I thought it would have been slightly more opinion-based, but as I read further it talks to how he feels and about how people in the Community are not to be treated like aliens, but like humans because we all go through this life one day at a time.

The second article, while I found a little difficult to read because of how many different topics were in the post, however, I did thoroughly enjoy reading it and how the author connected other similar occurrences in Hollywood to how the equal representation movement should also stretch to the Deaf Community as well.


  1. UC Santa Cruz’s, “Student Pushes for Authentic Representation of Deaf Community”                                                                                                                  **The video related to this link can be found at the bottom of the post. I definitely recommend viewing as it is informative and can shed a light on some Deaf Community do’s and don’t’s.
  2.  Verywell Health, Melissa Karp Aud, “Ways Deaf and Hearing Culture Are Different

If you go to my YouTube history, you’ll find that I watch many ASL videos (mostly song interpretation). I have seen Chrissy Marshall’s videos before. Because I already had a connection between the video creator and the article I felt that it was challenging to distinguish it from opinion and news. I decided on opinion because the lists that she provides is in the ASL community and not so much universal. When detailing the differences in the Deaf Community vs. the ASL Community, there will always be minor differences in how the Community views themselves individually.

Finally, the reason I chose this last article to be opinion-based was because Melissa Karp studies the Deaf Culture, and while her knowledge in the field is credible, I felt that because of the post’s length, there just was not much to go on. I felt that it was more of a top 10 tips than something where there is hundreds of participants in a quantitative study.

When writing this post, I felt it was somewhat difficult determining if some of these articles were news or opinion because the two opinion articles come from either people in the Deaf Community or they are a medically-certified audiologist. Where as the two news sources were done taking more of an analytical approach so I feel that depending on viewpoints, the news and opinions can vary depending on who is believed to be the “credible source”.

**Dos and Don’ts of Interacting with the Deaf Community [CC]