Post History

Source: https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/48783
License name: CC BY-SA 4.0
License URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

Source: https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/48783
License name: CC BY-SA 4.0
License URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

Analysis obviously has to include objective news as the subject of the analysis, but it is not necessarily opinion.

For example, News might quote the President, or a candidate. Analysis might take that quote and demonstrate, objectively, it is false. Or demonstrate that while true, it is also misleading.

An example is a recent story I read on burying (in a landfill) wind turbine blades that are beyond repair, and the author quoted some millions of tons of blades thusly buried. That was an objective fact, and news to me. They then went on to an opinion, that increasing the load on the environment in a landfill was negating the supposedly environmentally friendly aspect of using wind turbines instead of fossil fuels.

However, an Analyst could anticipate (or respond) to this. I checked, the ANNUAL wind turbine blade burial accounts for something like 0.01% of our DAILY dump into landfills. It is completely insignificant, the material they are made from produces no significant carbon dioxide or methane by rotting, and rotting food and other organic materials produce the vast amount of greenhouse gases in landfills.

It is completely safe, with regard to greenhouse gases, to bury wind turbine blades. They could be pulverized (using green wind electricity, of course) and dumped or buried.

Analytical news can use facts and reasoning (not opinion) to clarify some piece of news, and show that it is alarming, or not alarming, true or false, or true but intentionally misleading, or technically false but something quite similar and equally alarming is true, and so forth.

Ideally Analysis provides **context** and additional facts so readers **understand** the News.

Original score: 1