When is the right time to push for information?

This article is about a mass shooting that happened in Oregon on Thursday October 2ed. The article mainly focuses on how reports may get information about the shooting.

The author, Paul Farhi, argues that reports come off as rude or inconsiderate when asking a question about the event to an eyewitness. Farhi uses tweets to support his argument. He quotes one report that agrees with him. "I understand why so many people are bothered. You can’t be a reporter of, well, anything without doing lots of things that are perceived as rude. But what is the alternative?" The author creamy understands the topic and summarizes it so the the reader has an idea of what happened without having to do more research. Farhi adds the presidential address over the topic to the article to provide the reader with more information. Farhi gives us information said on tweeter that supports his argument. Another way that works wonders on improving an argument is adding information (or tweets) that doesn't support what he is arguing He can then explore why this is not the case and convene some of the more skeptic readers. the author concludes that even though the world needs reports out gathering information, people should be more considerate when asking the questions.

The evidence effectively supports the main ideas. The evidence provides a clear understanding of the point of the article. The article is very clear. This is the only article I have read over the topic. I understand that a mass shooting happened and people are lashing out at reports for being rude and need to minimize harm done. This article bring up a good point the as journalist we should know when to push for information and when to pull back.
For more information, click here.