Where do I start critiquing last week’s top news story, “The Link accuses Toews of incompetence?” Well, here’s a start: you do not write an article about another newspaper’s article. By very few standards is that considered good journalism. What’s next, a special section devoted to giving the rundown of this week’s Gazette? Are we that desperate for story ideas these days?
Also, the article was extremely biased. Why didn’t you just get an op-ed piece from Toews if you were only going to present his side of the issue? Let me guess: you called but he hung up on you. It would have benefited the piece and your credibility to interview, say, the people who were said to have been kicked out of Toews’ office.
This is an editorial piece masquerading very unconvincingly as a news story. Did you perhaps think that the Link’s editorial was one-sided, and want to balance it with this article? Editorials are allowed to be one-sided; news isn’t. In fact, aren’t you sort of supposed to take a position in editorials? Hrm… Furthermore, you cannot expect your readers to have read the Link’s editorial and just assume that’ll take care of the anti-Toews position, which from what I’ve read is not exclusive to the Link.
The one-word quotes scattered here and there were barely distinguishable from the rest of the article. I especially liked, “He boastfully admits that because he hired extra help for Orientation, this year’s Orientation was ‘the best.'” Good one. What the heck is boastfully admitting anyway?
And Adam Slater was “part of last year’s CanDo CSU executive” last year, was he? Well, I’m sure you’ve already heard from him.