I really like the new assignment that Husband added to our list of to-do's. I added a daily journal entry. He amended, saying that she needed to read an article off of the New York Times in the World section and summarize it twice a week.
Mi'ita will probably complain bitterly about it soon. She's already grumpy, but she's doing it.
Today she read Germany Knows Nothing Of Alleged CIA Murder Plot. She's rather fond of Germany right now, so anything with Germany in it. We had to read it together because there is so much she doesn't know about. What is an embassy? A private security firm? A secret operation? Who is al Qaeda? What does alleged mean? What does it mean when the CIA declines to comment? Vanity Fair, blacklisted, Hamburg cell, bombings in Spain and in East Africa... We talked for a good hour on our own about this short article. Then we talked a good half an hour more with the Daddy over dinner about this. I was wrong about something myself. I thought that if the CIA declines to comment it is akin to an admission of guilt. No. Husband, who used to be in NSA, says that the CIA declines to comment about everything as a policy so that you can't interpret it that way.
Then she had to write a paragraph about it--only five sentences--but it had to be written well. First sentence is a topic sentence. Next three are supporting details. Last sentence is why this is important enough to get into the New York Times. She had to date it and write the name of the article and the magazine. It took awhile, but I think she will get the hang of it. This is her summary:
Jan. 4, 2010
The CIA was accused of a murder plot. According to Vanity Fair, the CIA sent a team of mercenaries to Hamburg to kill Mamoun Darkazanli in 2004. MD is a German citizen who donated to al Qaeda. He is connected to 9-11 and two other bombings. German is our ally. What if we did do this?
"Germany Knows Nothing Of Alleged Murder Plot" NY Times
Short, but not bad for a 9 year old.
I think she's got a great future as a journalist! Very well summarized!
ReplyDeleteOne of the best pieces of reporting/writing advice I ever received was to write two questions at the top of every story, which the reporter must be able to answer in order to tell the story well. The questions are: 1) What's the story? and, 2) What's the point, (i.e., who cares, why should we spend time reading this)?
Incidentally, Daddy is, of course, right about "refused to comment," especially about the CIA, but pretty much everybody still thinks it looks bad in print. We use that as leverage when we talk to sources. "Sure, you can say 'no comment,' but then only the other side of the story will be told. Wouldn't you prefer we get your side straight?"
(That said, we know it would never work with the CIA.)
I like those two questions. We'll use them. I always introduced a lesson with my students: "What is an encyclopedia/dictionary/search engine/etc and why should you care?"
ReplyDelete