On Wednesday, September 14, the Atlantic Coast Conference (ACC) of the NCAA decided to move all of its neutral site championships games out of the state of North Carolina, due to House Bill 2, which is widely believed to infringe on the rights of the LGBT community. This decision comes after NCAA and the NBA moved marquee events from North Carolina, and while it didn’t make the front pages, it was well covered. The two best articles that I found discussing the move were from The New York Times and The Washington Post.

The way the journalists wrote these articles is very similar. They begin with providing the main information in the first paragraph. As the article progresses they provide information about information about the economic effect for the cities, and the impact students of the schools in the most represented state in the ACC. The journalists provided quotes from the ACC, statements from schools in the ACC, and reactions from people within the sports industry that have a connection to the state of North Carolina, or the ACC.

The biggest thing I liked about these articles was the alternate side they provided to this news story. The ACC leaving North Carolina will a have a large effect from a sports angle-where will the championships be moved to, how with the students react to the change, etc., but both articles brought economics and politics into the equation. Since the ACC is not the only organization who moved major events outside North Carolina, the journalists provided background and statistics on the economic effects of the NBA, NCAA and ACC all moving their respective events out of the state.

The House Bill 2 has been at the center of some controversy since it was signed into effect, and both articles had quotes from politicians from North Carolina-both Republican and Democrat. The ability of the authors to keep the article bi-partisan was impressive, which is something I wish to work on for future projects. With so much controversy going on in the world, so many stories where everyone seems to have an opinion, it’s hard to not show any bias while writing. Both journalists made it unclear where they stood on the decision, or the bill, which is an important technique of writing that I personally need to work on. The thoroughness of angles the journalists provided was also something that I hope to work on in my future writings. It’s a great way of connecting to a larger audience with a wide range of interests.