TIPS
FOR WRITING OPINION ARTICLES
Step
1
Do
your research. I
don’t mean in-depth, hours online research. I just mean for you to quickly find
out what is going on in your niche. What are the hot topics. New products. New
laws or changes in the marketplace. Get an idea of what people are talking
about. Check high-profile websites in your niche. Check forums.
Social media sites.
Step
2
Choose
a position. What
makes an opinion article unique is when you choose a position on an issue. You begin to grow
your voice and that is what will resonate with readers. Don’t be wishy-washy.
Make a choice. Either you like it or you don’t. Either it won’t work or it
will. Either it’s relevant or it isn’t.
Step
3
Write
in the first person.
I have read countless opinion articles by folks who weren’t comfortable with step 2, and
so they hide a little bit by writing in the third person. While writing in the
first person is used mainly in fiction, by using it, you are firmly saying “In
my opinion”, “I believe”, “I think”. This makes it clear on exactly where you
stand, and presents you as an authority on the topic which you are discussing.
Step
4
Include supporting facts and/or
examples. When
you are writing an opinion article, you don’t necessarily have to do this, but I find that
it makes your article stand out as an opinion from a “credible expert”. That is
to include examples, facts, statistics, quotes or whatever you have that can
support your position and your opinion on what you are writing.
Step
5
Don’t overanalyze the article. Just write it and put it out
there. Let it do what it’s going to do. Bring you wanted attention and
traffic:)
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/04/marijuana-legalization-research_n_1850470.html
ReplyDeletehttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/28/why-marijuana-should-be-legalized_n_1833751.html
http://www.usnews.com/debate-club/is-it-time-to-scale-back-the-war-on-drugs/arguments-for-the-legalization-of-marijuana-dont-stand-up
I'm writing an opinion piece about the legalization of marijuana. The third article has a negative view against legalization but I would take the article and turn it around and use it to prove why marijuana should be legal.
http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/m/marijuana/index.html
DeleteI want to write an opinion comparative piece on the different coffee baristas in town. I find I can constructively deconstruct the flavors (on the buds of a coffee enthusiast) of each coffee house’s house blends or their specialty cups of joe and through this make a determination on which one is definite best. I could go in depth about the atmosphere which surrounds the prized coffee houses and describe how this makes or breaks the experience of their delectable brews. I would find out where they get there coffee from and who supports there business around town. Since most people have different taste buds I would have to get a second opinion or joint this with a friend with a similar coffee obsession to counter balance my taste buds among another.
ReplyDeleteI am writing my opinion paper on why steroids are bad for baseball and why they create negative effects for baseball. I am in favor of the MLB doing more tests on the players throughout the year also.
ReplyDeletehttp://ezinearticles.com/?Why-Steroids-Are-Bad-for-Major-League-Baseball&id=809930
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/25/steroids-baseball_n_1830242.html
http://www.webmd.com/fitness-exercise/news/20050316/why-steroids-are-bad-for-you
I am writing my opinion piece on whether abortion should be legal. I'm taking a pro-choice stance and using myself and the fact that it would be a large medical risk for me to get pregnant as a sort of zoom-in/zoom-out method to capture the reader's attention.
ReplyDeleteI started with a statistic from the American Heart Association illustrating why it would be dangerous for me to get pregnant (http://circ.ahajournals.org/content/107/12/1692.full) and then I'm going to take a step back and look at the bigger picture. Many young girls have medical issues and, aside from anyone else's moral opinions, it is necessary for abortion to be an option for them in case they find themselves in a potentially fatal predicament. -Suzy Berkowitz
I am going to write my opinion piece about technology use in education in young children. I believe that as technology advances it should be introduced as a learning tool, but to a certain extent. With too much technology, children’s development can be affected, and they miss out on learning simple, but important things such as penmanship and social skills. Parents often complain about their kids watching too much tv, or playing video, but many young children of elementary school age already have their own personal computers and cell phones, which is just as bad. My opinion is that technology should be limited in classroom use, because of how it effects early child development.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.kqed.org/assets/pdf/education/earlylearning/media-symposium/technology-children-naeyc.pdf?trackurl=true
I'm going to write my opinion piece on how I feel like the last few years in the movie industry have been clogged with remakes and adaptations. What happened to original screenplays!? What happened to creativity and creating something completely new that could change the world?? I find it mystifying that we have a surplus of original books but that the same form of creativity can't be used to write original screenplays? I'm not saying I'm not a fan of adapting a book into a film, in fact some of my favorite movies of all time are adaptations. I just want more! I demand more! And I know that the talent to achieve this is out there, they just need to find their voice.
ReplyDeleteI am writing my opinion paper on how technology helps people of the world become closer together. There are many pro's and con's but i am for it, so i am going to write about how it can benefit society and make people make bonds stronger
ReplyDeletehttp://www.debate.org/opinions/does-the-internet-bring-people-closer-together
http://www.english-test.net/forum/ftopic52957.html
http://www.oppapers.com/essays/Internet-Brings-People-Together/448992
http://internetandpeople.blogspot.com/2011/01/internet-will-bring-people-of-world.html
http://idebate.org/debatabase/debates/science-technology/house-believes-internet-brings-more-harm-good
http://nenfig.wordpress.com/2010/06/03/the-internet-bringing-people-closer-together/
I am right. If you don’t believe in what I do, then you are wrong. Not only are you wrong, but what I believe in is so imperatively human and necessary for sustained survival socially, civilly, economically, and moralistically, that to even question its validity is to paint yourself a nemesis against the world. My belief is the hinge upon which the fate of humanity swings, the fulcrum of our future; it is what will decide our fate as a nation, a people, a species, and a member of our global ecosystem.
ReplyDeleteIn a recent study it was shown that 95.4% of Americans believe in what I do. An an unrelated study, it was shown that 4.6% of all Americans are godless heathens with antisocial psychopathic tendencies. Those 4.6% were also shown to be antipatriots, enemies of the state, rapists, domestic terrorists, murderers, and drug addicts. Charles Manson did not believe in what I do. Stalin, the late Kim Jong-Il, and (Goodwin forgive me) Adolf Hitler did not believe in what I do.
Not only do all heteronormative, well adjusted, god-fearing, apple-pie eating, red blooded Americans believe in what I do, but those that do have also found the added benefits of better sex, whiter teeth, more restful sleep, better posture, pronounced weightloss, larger muscles, and improved eyesight to accompany this unarguable truth that has engrained itself into their being, according to an ivy league survey.
Our Constitution clearly supports my belief, as does the Bill of Rights, the Bible, Koran, and Torah. Polythiests and polygamists do not believe in what I believe in, nor do homosexuals or immigrants. That being said, my belief is worldly, and has supporters as far away as the better half of Korea. Communists and fascists do not only not believe in what I believe, but they actively protest against it. In fact, in a recent statement from the New Socialist Coalition states that my belief is “bad” and “morally bankrupt”.
Our economy functions on my belief. My belief assures that the market is balanced, that the poor do not suffer, that our GDP continues to rise, that our national debt will not only slow its growth, but will eventually begin to fall, and that our currency will once again become the most powerful in the world.
Those that plot against my belief plot for our destruction blah blah blah eventually a call to arms against the non believers, that they are all about us, etc.
While the matter of abortion has been a controversial issue since the Roe. Vs Wade Supreme Court ruling that legalized this procedure 1973, it has become even more prominent in the 2012 Presidential Elections. While President Obama and Mitt Romney don’t have a few things they can both agree on, abortion and the use of contraceptives is definitely not one of them. In fact, Obama and Romney’s policies on abortion are on completely opposite ends of the spectrum. President Obama is Pro-choice and has provided free birth control under Obamacare, whereas Mitt Romney is Pro-life, and adamantly against abortions in just about every instance. While Obama acknowledges that his policies may go against some religious beliefs, he believes the necessity of these options trump religion, and I couldn’t agree more.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.nytimes.com/2004/07/22/opinion/owning-up-to-abortion.html
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/ryan-obama-stands-abortion-any-time-under-any-circumstances-and-even-taxpayer-expense_652351.html
http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/07/abortion_the_economy_and_the_2012_election.html
So there’s been a lot of talk about young people not voting. I was one of those young people. Too lazy to fill out a sheet of paper, not really into politics, not caring about the election, assuming that the right person would win because the right people would vote. How silly of me. Elections are happening and someone is getting elected president and no one’s fighting too hard to change that. So young people should vote. Yes, we’re young and may not think too hard about our social, economic and cultural issues (or maybe some of us do). We just want to finish college and find a job or some of us don’t have jobs and want to continue searching for one or some of us won’t get jobs and will never get one. THE ELECTION AFFECTS US. A lot of people have said, “Well I’m not voting because I don’t want to vote for the lesser of two evils.” Reality check: If you don’t vote for anyone that’s one more chance that the lesser of two evils could potentially win. Why take that chance? So just VOTE. Vote for Obama, vote for Romney, vote for Jill Stein. I don’t care who you vote for. JUST VOTE. Read a few articles on the candidates. Watch the conventions. Form an opinion and act on it. And if you’re not going to, you better have a damn good reason. “Indifference elicits no response. Indifference is not a response. Indifference is not a beginning; it is an end,” and a bad one at that.
ReplyDeleteSo my opinion is that young people should VOTE...
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/20/us/politics/struggling-young-adults-pose-challenge-for-campaigns.html?ref=politics
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/01/us/politics/01generationo.html
http://electionstudies.org/nesguide/gd-index.htm#7
http://rendezvous.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/04/27/obama-will-need-young-voters-to-keep-his-job-even-if-they-dont-have-one/
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/02/us/politics/economy-cuts-into-obamas-youth-support.html
Michelle Kosilek is serving a life sentence for murdering her wife in 1990. Kosilek is a transgender woman and recently (and after much controversy) a judge in Massachusetts ordered the state to pay for the her sex change operation. I want to write an opinion piece on why this was the right decision..
ReplyDeletehttp://www.scribd.com/fullscreen/104902489?access_key=key-bib7ocbrv5fjg1c5loy
http://ideas.time.com/2012/09/10/are-prisoners-entitled-to-sex-changes/
http://www.wwlp.com/dpp/news/politics/state_politics/wwlp-taxpayer-funded-sex-change-surgery-cl
This past May, Mayor Michael Bloomberg of NYC proposed a ban on soda drinks larger than 16 ounces. On Sept. 13 2012, the NYC Board of Health approved it. This outraged me because although it is very important to lead a healthy lifestyle, I believe that is up to the individual to decided what is healthy and what isn't. I believe Bloomberg has taken away a precious thing from New Yorkers: the right to choose. Here are two links to back up my opinion.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/31/nyregion/bloomberg-plans-a-ban-on-large-sugared-drinks.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/14/nyregion/health-board-approves-bloombergs-soda-ban.html
My Opinion
ReplyDeleteWhat’s wrong with drinking a large, refreshing soda after a hard day of work? Well according to New York City Mayor Bloomberg, a lot.
The soda buzz sparked back in May when the Bloomberg administration proposed the ban of large sugary drinks exceeding 16 fluid ounces. One week ago on Sept. 13, Bloomberg’s wish was granted when the New York City Board of Health approved the proposal to ban the sale of large drinks in restaurants, street vendor carts, movie theaters and eventually in sports arenas. This measure will take effect on March 12, 2013. Ironically, large milk shakes and diet sodas will not be acknowledged under this motion. So instead of enjoying 20 ounces of sugar and empty carbs, why not enjoy the same 20 ounces of carcinogens? Sounds about right to me. Let’s decrease the rate of obesity, but kill off the population slowly with cancer. It’s already happening.
Obesity is a nationwide issue, and heart disease is the number one killer of Americans. Although soda is not particularly healthy for you, it is not the end of the world if you decide to drink a 20 ounce soda at a movie theater in my opinion. Not all fat people drink soda and soda doesn’t make all people fat. What makes people become overweight and sick is lack of exercise and genetics, but that is a whole other bag of shells.
The main issue I think is that Americans are just lazy. People don’t want to get up and run or go to the gym, they would rather sit in front of the computer playing World of War Craft or watching some ridiculous reality show on TV. Of course, this may not be the case for everyone. If you run 2 miles at least three times a week and want to drink a 20 ounce cola, by all means do it. Hell, if a 300 pound couch potato and still want to chug at it, go for it! Do you know why you can do this? That’s right. Because you are American and have the right to choose to be unhealthy or healthy. If a person can buy a cigarette, which contains carcinogens such as rat poison and nicotine, and then light it up, inhale, and exhale smoke into children’s faces, why can’t you ingest a carbonated, sugary drink? I digress a little here, but it is something to think about. Remember, cancer is one of the top three killers in our nation and the death rates it leaves in its wake still leaves scientists and politicians baffled. I’m not too baffled at all and I am not a biochemist.
Bloomberg’s argument along with the eight board members who voted in favor of this, had good intentions in banning large drinks. Obesity and diabetes are critical diseases and are severe problems in America. Dentists will also be the first ones to tell you that soda rots your teeth, and it does. But in my eyes, it is a parent’s job to limit the soda intake of their children and the individual’s business how they manage their daily calories. The Bloomberg administration may be patting themselves on their backs for sending the city into a health funk, but they have been hoodwinked.
In the New York Times Article, Eliot Hoff, spokesman for New Yorkers For Beverage Choices said, “By imposing this ban, the board has shown no regard for public opinion or the consequences to businesses in the city.” He also said that 60 percent of New Yorkers thought Bloomberg’s plan was a bad idea. And I have to agree with the 60 percent.
The reason this is the first law of its kind in our nation is because it’s not democratic. This limits New Yorker’s options and freedom to choose. Also, sure they banned 20 ounce drinks but hey, anyone can buy two 16 ounce cups and drink 32 ounces, more than the size of a 20 ounce and the same as the largest drink on the market. Someone forgot to do the math.
Flying cars, teleportation, talking houses, this 20 years ago is what our world imagined technology would advance into. While we might not have flying cars, technology has certainly advanced in other ways and has begun to take over simple aspects of our lives. Take a minute to think, is there even one day, one hour you go without using any form of technology, or technology influencing you?
ReplyDeleteWhile most see this as a good thing and it certainly has its shining moments, what about the drawbacks technology brings? As you look at a 6 foot 3 tall businessman in a suit carrying his coffee on his way to work, talking on his cell phone and doing paperwork on his IPad, you don’t think much of it. What about when you see a 6 year old playing with that same IPad and technological tool a grown adult is using? This for some people causes the little bell in your head to go off and raises concern.
What if that 6 year old was handed this IPad when she entered kindergarten and used it every day for hours until her high school graduation? As technology advances it becomes imbedded into our everyday lives, including education. Technology can certainly be beneficial for some aspects of education and learning, but I believe too much technology in the classroom and involved in a child’s learning process, hurts early childhood development.
New Trier School district as well as many others around America and the world, are looking to bring IPad’s into the classroom. The argument is that it is easier to take notes, be organized, and textbooks can then be replaced through online books. Students using IPad’s everyday though, in my opinion take away what made elementary school so great.
There is less face-to-face interaction with other children and the adults, having a grueling effect on social skills of young kids. Students do not only learn how to communicate as well, but lose a sense of their basic motor and language development skills. Touching a screen and communicating through chat, do not efficiently take the place of talking and speaking to another human being who can respond back and you can assess their reactions, as well as the function of holding a pencil.
Cognitive skills are also at loss for children, because many kids between the ages of birth and seven years learn from experience and their surroundings. With IPad’s and other extremely advanced forms of technology, what will come out of them observing everyone looking down, their eyes fixed and fingers touching computer screens?
Besides social, basic educational skills are forgotten as well. If you take notes typing on your IPad all the time, how will a child ever learn penmanship, or to sign their name in a way other then typing on a keypad? Those are the major causes for concern I think of and that people overlook when throwing technology at young children so early in their lives.
Taking away motor, development, social as well as cognitive skills don’t only affect a child’s classroom learning, but life at home as well. A loss of human interaction can cause trouble sleeping, over excitedness, depression and children lose a sense of the core values that hold and bring a family together in the home.
I think we need to take a step back from the flying cars, and sometimes go back to picking up a pen and paper, or that worn out copy of our favorite book with the coffee stains on it, and enjoy the things that helped our early childhood development, and keep that apart of the lives of future generations