I chose this headline because of the title. It sounded rather dramatic and it made me think the that the story would be personal. I thought that the headline seemed to have some real impact when you read it.
The story has many factors that make it newsworthy. Firstly, there is certainly impact. By using a real woman’s story, there is more impact. It makes the information seem real and create sympathy. The story also has timeliness. Currently, there is a great deal of debate about welfare and poverty. By using this woman’s story, the author can bring up issues in the government while focusing still creating impact.
This is a narrative lead. Instead of just coming out with the subject, the author describes Cassie Winders. It plays into her emotions. Her bleak situation is also described through his description of her living situation. By using his descriptive language, the author conveys the distress that the woman is going through. He uses very specific examples to show her problems.
The nut graph is the fifth paragraph in. While it does not talk about Cassie directly, it shows the big picture. The paragraph describes what is happening to the stimulus package for people like Cassie. It gave facts about the decreases. This paragraph gives the reader an idea about what Cassie is going through, and helps them understand the rest of the story.
This story definitely provides enough detail. It has a great amount of facts, and quotes. I think the most memorable thing from the story was the quote, “What can I do differently?” she asked herself. “Will I lose the house? Can I pay the water bill? Is there enough food to last the week?”. I think the quote provides the most impact in the story. With the repeated questions, the quote gives a feel of desperation, with seems to be a theme within the article.
There were a few sources used in this story. The main one was Cassie. Another was U.S representative Paul Ryan, as well as Tim Huelskamp another representative. I think these were good sources because as Cassie’s story argued for food stamps, the representative’s argued against them. There were also a great deal of statistics used, providing the cold hard facts about the package. I believe all of these things were effective. These allowed the articles to show both sides of the argument.
Unfortunately, there was no multi media involved in the story. I wish there had been a video of Cassie or even photographs of her living situation. This would have created so much more of an impact if the audience could see it for themselves.