Explore BrainMass

Analysis of editorial article: Evaluate EPA not banning lead in gun ammunition article

Select an editorial from a newspaper, magazine or online news source on a topic of your interest. Respond (in detail) to the following questions and requirements by writing a paragraph for the selected article:

-Who is the author and what is the topic of the article?
-What is the author's point of view?
-What details should the author have included in the article to make his point more persuasive and more understandable?
-Did the voice and point of view of the author change?
-Quote any passages that you think were especially descriptive or memorable.
-Where do you think the article lies on a continuum of effectiveness? Your choices are very effective, effective, satisfactory, and unsatisfactory.

Provide proper citations and references in APA format.

Your grade will be based on the detailed review and evaluation of your selected article.

Solution Preview

The content of the attached solution document is copied and pasted here for you. This text box does not show hyperlinks and/or italics that are required for APA citations.

You may choose to review any news editorial article that you like, or have interest in. The article I choose for this example in how to approach responding to this assignment is from the New York Times' website, and can be found at URL: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/13/opinion/13mon4.html?_r=1&ref=editorials.

First, read the article, looking for the main ideas, and the evidence the author of the editorial cites as proof of their claims. Think about what questions the article makes you think of - what do you still want to know about this topic? The text of the entire article is copied and pasted here for you:

The Bullet That Keeps on Killing
Published: September 12, 2010
At the end of August, the Environmental Protection Agency turned down a petition to ban lead from the manufacture of hunting ammunition. According to the agency, it lacked the legal authority to regulate lead in that form.

But that conclusion is legally dubious and it was a sudden and premature about-face for the agency, which had planned a two-month public comment period on the subject. And the turnaround came after the National Rifle Association asked the E.P.A. to reject the petition. The N.R.A. said this was just a backhanded attempt to impose gun control.

The N.R.A. should consult the hunters among its members. They know that getting lead out of the environment is essential. Lead is as toxic in nature as it is in the form of lead paint in houses. Scientists have established a clear link between lead from ammunition and the poisoning of some 75 species of birds - especially waterfowl and scavengers like condors, eagles and ravens.

There are safe, effective substitutes for lead in ammunition, and some states have experimented with a swap - encouraging hunters to trade in lead ammunition for nontoxic shells.

We urge the E.P.A. to reconsider this hasty decision. The agency has the authority it needs to regulate the lead in ammunition as ...

Solution Summary

This solutions contains a discussion and analysis of an editorial opinion article on the EPA's refusal to consider banning the lead in ammunition for guns. Did author prove their points? Why or why not was discussed and explained. A sample analysis paragraph is included.