The Frame of this article seems to push towards political. It discusses raises a lot of points discussing the issue of the DREAM Act and discussed how certain party members such as Reid and McCain's feelings towards the issue of this event. It raised more points on how young illegal immigrants can become citizens through school or joining the military, some very good approaches the problem. The only problem is that it's not always possible for people to get the money for college and they might not want to risk their lives for citizenship. The main point this article raises is that the Senate should pass this bill and argues that this is not a new problem but ongoing.

#1-immigrants return to work quicker than americans #2-immigrants gained 656 thousand jobs since end of recession #3-immigrant wages had largest wage drop of any group #4-decreasing immigrant unemployment unclear #5-steve camarota says there should be tighter controls over immigrant employment during economic times

#1- Hispanics are divided on how they feel about effect of illegal immigration #2-in 2007, majority of Hispanics said they were having a positive impact #3- there is a division between US born Hispanics and foreign born Hispanics #4- majority of Hispanics oppose Arizona's immigration law

This is an example of good journalism. Although this article is an opinion piece, it presents facts effectively. It brings to light Meg Whitman's hypocrisy by comparing her actions to her well-publicized campaign promises.

This article would be better if it were more in-depth. It is a very brief, but very informative, piece about the latest update in the Arizona immigration law debacle. But in general I think this article is important to advance the public's dialogue about the issue and inform more people about what's going on.

I gave this a bad overall rating because even though it is an opinion piece, the writer of the story did not use any quotes or list any sources what so ever. They do not show any credibility to what they have written, and it's clearly just their own personal view point throughout the whole thing. They should have given more background to the story and more details within it. This is a personal responsibility frame, and there is a clear distinction from the other frames that aren't used because of when they say,"... Whitman should not be blamed for doing what the law requires of employers- maintaining a legal work force." Also, in the very beginning when they state,"...it's difficult to see how Rublican gubernatorial..." they are ... More »

This story clearly shows Eddy Zheng in a positive light. But is that how it should be portrayed? The writer merely skims over the face that Eddy has been in prison for 20 years and that he went to prison for an aggravated felony. The writer is clearly pro Eddy Zheng and thinks it would be a detriment to the Bay Area society if he were deported. The writer states no experts in this article and gives little credible information. The writer frames the story in the way that Eddy is a great guy now, he works with kids, he’s turned his life around. But if I was a parent I would not want my kids having a role model that is an illegal immigrant and has been in prison for twenty years. This story lacks context. It has no real ties to ... More »

I thought that this was good journalism, but it is not necessarily an example of a good opinion piece. Robbie Brown does not clearly state which side of the spectrum he is on. The institutional frame used was appropriate to this piece because immigration is now being brought into the federal aspect, it is not just involved in the states. The piece was written well, but I would not say that it is sourced very well. The author does not have many quotes, just one from an Immigration group in Washington. Since the story is about immigrants not being able to continue on to higher education in Georgia, I would have tried to get more sources from Georgia, where the article is relevant. Overall the institutional frame was relevant to ... More »

This article framed the institutional responsibility of educating immigrants to not vote. It had a personal story of Joseph's problem of facing deportation, but went into not only how he got himself there, but how maybe the government failed to warn Joseph of the repercussions of voting. It also asked the question of if immigrant voting actually changes voting results. How much of a problem is it? I like how it framed the problem in such a way that it shows the reader the big picture and how immigrant voting affects the whole nation.

This is an example of good journalism because it focuses on the main reason why Latinos primarily vote Democrat rather than Republican. This article talked about how many Latinos are not helping swing the voted for the GOP candidates, but the number of Latinos that do vote are dramatically voting for the democratic nominees, Jerry Brown and Barbara Boxer rather than Meg Whitman and Carly Fiorina. The article does mention Whites as being quite neutral in the race, while Latinos obviously prefer voting for more liberal candidates. There are more sources pointing toward Latinos voting more Democratic and there are several polls showing the statistics; Jerry Brown has a 19-point margin over Meg Whitman, and Barbara Boxer has an ... More »

While the information was is all here I cry "poor story telling." Factual and dry writing is the new trend when it comes to online journalism. Yet, this article attempts to mask itself as a in-depth story while really just stating the facts. Fine for informational purposes, not a good read.

The article did answer the questions I had behind why Senate put a stall on the measure that would allow undocumented immigrants citizenship. The article backed up the points it stated my quoting others and giving links to some of the things he brought up in the article. However, the author did not give a lot of facts to back up the points made. The article helped me to get better informed on the subject even if there was some biased in the author's tone. Until reading the article I did not know what the dream act was. Bringing up that the stall to pass the act was stalled by Republican lawmakes will bring up discussion on whether or not the Dream Act should be passed or not and how to deal with the issue of immigration and ... More »

The story was as accurate as it could be when taking the commentary stance that it did. Interpretations are a dime a dozen, but the issues the reporter identified, Mr. Obama wanting get recognition for keeping his promise, yet wanting to avoid another “mission accomplished,” seem like accurate, political motivations. And this leads to the balance of the article, which I felt gave, at least politcally, both sides, equally stressing how delicate any “end” to Iraq truly is. The story lacked a solid seperation of editorializing and news, spending the majority of space theorizing what the reporter said was only “passing” comments by the president. The story seemed to remain independent. It also had decent, not ... More »

This story didn’t have very much accuracy. It presented factual information about the subject but it didn’t site any sources, it didn’t have any quotes, and it didn’t check any of the facts against other facts. There wasn’t much balance either. There were no other party’s comments on the matter, the story was clearly one-sided. It lacked editorial separation. The writer didn’t use “I” but it was clear what their opinion was. The watchdog conscience was good in this story, the writer clearly and concisely explained what the DREAM Act was and what its outcome would be. There wasn’t much independence in this piece. The writer clearly had a hidden agenda. It was clear that they were in favor of this act getting ... More »

CNN writers Walsh, Harding, and Shoichet reported on comedian Stephen Colbert’s appearance in the congressional hearings over immigration and farming. The authors lightly graze the complexities behind the immigration issue, giving more favor to Colbert’s celebrity and the sensational manner of his appearance and perseverance to stay “in character”. The authors though are obviously partisan, as they write Colbert “injected a little sarcasm” into the hearing. Had this been written by an unbiased, non-partisan journalist, they might have written something like “comedian Stephen Colbert appeared in character at a congressional hearing about farm workers and undocumented immigrants.” The article doesn’t really have ... More »

A). the article explained complexities to this issue. It explained what exactly the rally was, when, where, and why. It offers quotes and evidence from other people throughout the country that this rally is in fact a big deal, and will be taken seriously. B). this article made the reader understand that this issue was not supposed to be as serious as it is going to really be, and that this is a huge event that over 120,000 people will attend. This is a counter rally in response to Glenn Beck's recent rally. Many are looking forward to what will happen at the rally, as Jon Stewart is in fact a comedian, not a politician. This event will be aired all over our country, as it is a must see event. C). The only question I have is: ... More »