Reflection on Project 3

1. The introduction was completely revised. Some of the sentences were too long and the theme was too broad.

2. At first I meant to tackle another topic along with the one I ended up using. I thought that the loss of trust I emphasized at the beginning would be reinforced with an argument about photo alterations and staging. In the end I focused solely on the need for preserving photojournalism.

3. The change was about a shift in purpose. I wanted to narrow the focus and concentrate on one vital argument. The second issue felt like an afterthought during the first draft writing process, it was unnecessary to my main point.

4. The revision isn't a credibility issue; the main ideas stayed intact. The text lost no integrity from the revision. The topic that was removed is a stand-alone issue that could be the subject of another public argument.

5. The issue raised in the argument has a wide range. Adding another topic would have meant much more information to read and may not have been as effective in informing the reader about the main point. This approach simplified the reading process.

6. Some of the sentences contained too much information and had to be broken into smaller ones for clarification. Sometimes the ideas were unclear and needed to have a better explanation or simpler implications.
For example, "The corruption and incompetence that is rampant in once-respected public institutions like photojournalism have repelled a generation; a great many have turned inward toward themselves and their inner circles,  narrowing their world-views and losing sight of what is happening elsewhere," was revised to state: "The corruption and incompetence that is rampant in once-respected public institutions like photojournalism have repelled many; they have turned inward toward their inner circles, shutting themselves off to what is happening elsewhere."

7. The changes brought into focus the main points in a more straightforward way. A basic understanding is more likely with more concise verbiage.

8. I did have to reconsider what was appropriate for the genre. At one point I had an idea that sounded too conversational and informal, and had to reword it to fit the genre. The same idea was presented but in a way that was more appropriate.

9. The process of reflection brings insight that might have been missed without it. It has made me think about non-fiction in a better light. There are useful processes that I can add to what I already know.