The bad lead I found was in Monday's April 21 article in The Columbian:
Wealthy, self financed congressional candidate Jack Davis says the McCain Feignolds act's "Millionaire's Amendment," which raises the contribution limits for opponents of wealthy, self-financed candidates, is not only unfair but also unconstitutional, and his lawyers will try to persuade the Supreme Court of that Tuesday.
I believe this lead is very lengthy and has way too many word descriptions in the first sentence. Wealthy and self financed are not needed in the first sentence because they are long and I feel like the writer is trying to focus on the description of Jack Davis too much.
The good lead I found was in Monday's April 21 article in The Columbian:
Authorities say an 18 year old South Carolina student is behind bars after collecting the supplies needed to bomb his school.
This is a very well written lead because it is right to the point and is very short in detail. This lead provided you with everything you needed to know in the first sentence and has the five w's and an h in it. The article also says that the student was accused and not found guilty.
1 comment:
I agree with the analysis of the former article having a bad lead. It had an insider-ring to it like it was technical literature. The second story had a good lead that definitely caught attention.
Post a Comment