The Best Way to Characterize an Editorial
The best way to characterize an editorial is through its content and how the editor engages with the reader. The targeted population is highlighted by the content, and the piece's diversity is highlighted by the presentation style. In a 2017 editorial, The Editorial Board criticized President Obama's decision to accept payment in return for motivational speeches. Aspects of ethics, according to the editorial, emerge when the former president neglects to donate the money collected during the exercise to his own charity. The editorial is presented by the author with problems brought up specifically for a political audience. The editorial critic will focus on the article and highlight aspects of credibility, the moral aspect, the connection to the audience and the nature of the presentation.
Credibility and Ethical Issues
Credibility remains a factor while highlighting issues within the editorial. Credibility bases on facts and the nature in which an editor substantiate arguments within an article. In the article, the author states the figure of compensation as 400 thousand dollars. The editorial lacks a true premise as he bases his facts on nonexistent sources. Failure to cite the source of the figure places the editorial on the negative. According to Rivers et al Argument that lacks facts classify an editorial as bad and lacks the moral grounds (28-30). The article states that for the former president to accept the compensation, his integrity is but in the question. The statement lacks premise since the amount is not a bribe. The author creates a false argument by introducing aspects of integrity on the issue of compensation handed out to president Obama. The article remains flat as it lacks substantiation in the amount issued by the president. Lack of bank statement and quotes from either president Obama or the Walls Street Journal questions the credibility of the editor and the article.
Ethics in the Editorial
Aspects of ethics arise from in the manner in which the editorial is presented. The article lacks an ethical ground. The article incriminates the former president without highlighting the path used while making the conclusion. The author tends to be biased in the nature in which they present their arguments. According to Munson and Black, ethic arises when an editorial tend to bias in the nature in which it presents its facts (194). In this case, the editorial lacks the moral authority to question the former president while at the same time holds a different view on author presidents. In the opening statement, the editorial states that previous presidents had received compensation. The author holds a biased opinion in that other presidents the act was perceived noble while to president Obama it is an unethical act. The editor fails to create a general view of presidents being compensated on issues perceived to be aimed at helping communities. The author chooses a single character to outline the wrongs and fails to address a common practice among retired presidents and people.
Disconnect with the Audience
The editorial fails to connect with the audience. The editorial was targeted at the political audiences and at the same time highlights ethical aspects within the political space. According to Spencer, the one requirement while writing an editorial is to find the audience and connect to the same audience (8-11). Failure to connect to the audience then creates a negative view of a given piece. The editor fails to connect to its audience as he embarks on personal aspects rather than address the issue as a matter of public interest. While drawing the audience, the author begins by addressing issues that positively places the president positively. The editorial then changes and begins addressing issues that the editor feels are against the belief of the president. The disconnect appears when the author highlights aspects of biasedness and mention one side of the political divide thus raising the issue of interest. The editorial highlights an editor that remains biased and thus disconnect with one section of the political space. Towards the end of the editorial, the author fails to offer solution thus creating suspense and thus failing to address issues the main issue as introduced in the earlier part of the editorial.
The Disconnection Between Heading and Body
The heading creates a sense of confusion. A disconnection appears between the editorial heading and the body. The heading bases on the cost of Obama speeches. The body on the author hand highlights mixed aspects with aspects of ethics and Obama's books taking center stage. Disconnect also appears towards the beginning of the book as the editor uses Obama quotes to justify claims of ethnicity. The social disconnect appears when the author indirectly blames public speaker and fails to address the cost incurred on the speaker's side while preparing the speech and other expenses. Addressing public while focusing on personal stand highlight the reason as to why the heading and the body do not form a connection.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the editorial piece while addressing public matters fails to meet the ethical elements, fails to connect to the audience, and fails in its presentation. The disconnection between the audience and the article is visible when the author takes a fixed stand and chooses to incriminate one character and ignores other characters. The author remains biased and fails to produce credible data and substantiation while putting across claims. The author tends to focus on personal imagination rather than backing his claims with available sources. The editorial, however, provides an insight of what the president had achieved thus creating a sense of background checks.
Works cited
Munson, Ronald & Black Andrew. The Element of Reasoning. Boston, MA: Cengage Learning, 2016. Print.
Rivers, Willaim, McIntyre Bryce & Work Alison. Writing Opinion: Editorials. Ames: Iowa State University Press, 1991. Print.
Spencer, Lauren. Step-by-step Guide to issue-Based Writing. New York. Rosen Publishing, 2005. Print.
The Editorial Board. “The cost of Obama Speech”. New York Times. 1 May. 2017. Web. 3 May. 2017
