I don’t often browse news websites in my free time so when trying to find an article to use for this assignment I looked at a few mainstream media organizations. The article that I ending up choosing is from the website USA Today. I researched online how accurate articles from this site are just out of curiosity and it was reported as being highly factual and used the least amount of biased sources. It did note that there is a slight left leaning editorial bias. This was pretty obvious by the article I chose. Credibility is interesting to think about when reading articles because people tend to have the assumption that news reports online have to be factual when almost more often than not there is a hidden agenda.
The article I ended up choosing is titled “Trump’s awful plan to arm teachers is straight from the NRA playbook.” I am not someone who is really knowledgable on or into politics but I am able to immediately tell that the title alone highlights the agenda of the article written by the columnist James, Alan Fox.
James starts off giving credit to Trump for meeting the grieving survivors of the recent Parkland, Florida shooting. He then dives straight to his point by the specific choice of language he uses. He talks about Trump’s ‘cozy, political alliance with the National Rifle Association’. This assists in getting his opinion across to readers. He also mentions Trump feeling caught between the students demands for stricter gun laws and his supporters concern for their second amendment rights. Trump’s NRA backed ‘solution’ is to have armed teachers in schools. I think a good counter argument to Trump’s solution would be to mention that there was an armed security officer on site that didn’t even enter the school. He was someone who was trained his whole life with guns and wasn’t able to enter the school and stop the shooter. How could we then expect our teachers to especially on their $40,000 a year salary?
I think the author did a good job of criticizing Trump’s solution from a leftist perspective but he could have offered a perspective from the other side. What would someone who supported Trump’s solution have to say? Because this topic is so controversial and currently trending I have seen what the supporters, who are mostly parents on my Facebook news feed have to say. They said that they would feel safer bringing their kids to school with armed teachers. I am not a parent yet so I don’t know what I would feel comfortable with at this point but I think at least hearing the two perspectives could assist me in forming a more knowledgable opinion. What I do know is that arming teachers is not going to be the only solution dealing with such a complex issue.
MDST 485 Class Blog 
Good topic by this being a trendy concern going on right now. I think you addressing the fact that there was a police officer there that didn’t make it in is a crucial detail to have left out. I have came across this a few times and this is the first I have heard of that. In addition, the idea that having that many extra guns in the school makes it that much more likely an accident shot could happen or it could be used against them is important. I think you did a great job but it could have been stronger if you didn’t argue both sides but picked on to voice you opinion as I felt the blog this week was suppose to focus on. Overall great pick!
But Trump says they’ll get some kind of bonus, so I’m sure that will qualify teachers to potentially kill a former student (eyeroll). Let’s take a look at the Maplewood incident earlier this month. A gun was holster, a 3rd grader accidently fired the weapon. Thank goodness no one was killed. Loaded guns in classrooms is not the answer.
Missy, I also saw this article while searching for something for this assignment and I thought it was a joke at first about arming teachers (Can you imagine?!) But I completely agree with you in that, when an author posting for a big name like USA Today, he or she should present unbiased facts and address both or all sides of an argument. Had I read the opposing viewpoint, I might have understood the reasoning better. Great job reviewing this article’s viewpoint; obviously, this is a very touchy subject right now. Huff Post offered varying versions of the article and I couldn’t bring myself to use this example out of purely being completely overwhelmed by it all and the amount of bias out there on the matter, not just in terms of arming teachers, but gun laws, etc. Like you, I don’t read a lot of this stuff in my free time (it’s just so sad :/).
Ps. I think you nailed the assignment; the idea was to find an article, blog, etc. that is misleading, biased or offers misinformation, making it difficult to not only find the truth, but to form an educated opinion of your own. We look to the news media and reporters to find reliable information on big topics but they often do not give all the information in an attempt to sway us in one direction or another. The same goes with less controversial issues, like a blog that is supposed to be informative but ends up just trying to sell you something. Again, good job!