Reference no: EM132539110

Question a) At a minimum, this is an opportunity to further develop your argument, introduction, conclusion, check or rethink the organization, add evidence and a counter-argument, check for logical sequencing of your evidence, better integrate quotations, and clean up grammatical, punctuation and citation errors. You can also go through to revise for style (see OWL conciseness handout Link ).

Question b) You can also do a wholesale revision and reworking to compare Daisey's story to Matt Stopera's Brother Orange Odyssey. If you do this here are some questions to think about: What precipitates each guy's trip to China? What are Stopera's expectations and what are Daisey's? What does each journalist actually produce? What is the public reaction to each? What is the larger story each initiates with their work? What ultimate outcomes or effects does each have?

Process: read over your paper and see what you already have about Daisey that works with this new comparative prompt. It should be almost everything. Then think about introducing Stopera in a comparative manner and covering his story. You'll need to revise your argument, but I'd wait to do this until after you've written more about Stopera. Remember to use your response to Brother Orange.

Question c) Or you can read and incorporate one of the following academic articles on Mike Daisey. Check these out--they're academic so they're a more of a challenge to read, but they serve as good models for how a story you've written about is handled by several academic disciplines.