The budget proposal “#TheWhoevers” does not explain what has been written about the topic in the past or how it is going to be reported. By simply listing a list of questions, the budget leaves out the aspects of the topic that have already been discovered. From Clark’s tool #42, it is important that writers do their homework so that they can see the direction the story is going. Although this type of budget proposal may be considered “turning procrastination into rehearsal,” from tool #41, I believe that more than a list of questions is necessary for a successful budget. There are also no sources listed for this piece, which is a critical aspect of planning a story.
The budget proposal “CAPS” could include many different profiles or point of views in a multi-installment story. Tool #45 encourages writers to take a big idea and break it into smaller parts. This story could include perspectives from doctors, students, and medical professionals outside of UGA in order to get a well-rounded story. This would require what tool #46 teaches, appreciating all participants in your story.
The proposal for “Rush,” was well detailed and included many sources that would help the piece come to life. There is no inclusion of what has been written about new gyms in Athens or the high stress level of students, which may be a helpful addition when starting to write. By diving into these bigger categories before writing this story, as tool #43 suggests, you can improve your own skills. Reading is as important as writing as you prepare a new story, so making sure you have explored the tools already out there at the beginning will help make the story have more depth and influence.
