So first off the bat, I've been working for months on the CSET to get a certification in English to add to my credential. I have studied a lot for it and have put in some pretty dedicated hours. I merely however, have no idea if I have studied the right way at all. So Im just going about it the best and seeing what happens. So Im just posting my practice essays here. For this practice essay, I responded to a sample question on the characeristic of good journalism. I don't know if this essay is the right idea, but it seems consistent with the practice book asked for. Any critiques on my views would be most appreciated. Please also note that I only put an hour into this particular draft because that's all the time I'll get on the test:
Good journalism should educate audiences on important issues and develop insight on the multiple perspectives to those issues. Journalists may have their own personal opinions for or the topics, but must be mindful of all arguments are both sides. Journalists attempting to sway audience's opinions need to be especially mindful of their all potential arguments against their particular opinions. Journalists open to all arguments toward issues can emphasize the reasons to support them and rectify any argument against them.
Good journalism is directly demonstrated through Monroe's motivational sequence; attention, need, satisfaction, visualization, and solution. An effective journalist gains the audience's attention by immediately alerting them of an issue. The journalist then efficiently convey appropriate rationale to investing attention to this issue. By understanding thier audience's value, the journalist effectively conveys to the audiene positives or negative impacts have resulted or could due to the topic. Journalists also keep all opinions in perspective to show open-mindedness to their audience's contrasting opinions.
Poor journalism is bias and one-sided. Explaining issues from an overly positive or negative viewpoint without acknowledging each counter-argument is propoganda, not journalism. Such journalists do a disservice to their audiences by not allowing ample opportunities to evalute each side to an issue. This causes a loss in credibility to the journalist. A spectator who is educated not decided on issue and witnesses such a bias description of it will lack respect and therefore sympathy as well in favor of that jorunalist. Audiences not educated on this issue except for a bias account on it may unfairly sympathize with the journalist.