“A Thirsty Colorado Is Battling Over Who Owns Raindrops” by Jack Healy is an article about who owns the right to rain. After watching a movie about a company owning a patent to seeds I did not think that much else could shock me. I was wrong. Apparently, residents in Colorado have asked permission to use rain barrels to collect the rain that falls off of their roof and have actually been denied! There is a 500$ a day fine in place to any individual who takes it upon themselves to collect water that falls on to their roof. Now I have heard it all. Again, using Jason Ohler’s assessment traits I came up with three categories in which to comment on this writing.
Story Flow (Score 1-10: 10 Points)
Information was presented concisely and in organized fashion. No detours or tangents.
This was a well written articles about odd decades old water laws in Colorado. The idea’s expressed were written in a clear and concise manner. The beginning started with a brief history of the laws followed by the modern day law that was trying to get passed. There was not much grey area or diversion from the topic at hand. Any change in point of view was used sole to expressed the multitude of the characters involved in this decision.
Reflection (Score 1-10: 9 Points)
The story offers unique perspectives based on reflection of events that happened in the story. The audience is inspired to reflect on their own practices.
This nonbiased article took several view points over the course of the story. There are so many people involved in the battle over water it would have been difficult to accurately represent all of them. Laws are different per city and county in regards to water collection and this article did a great job of not showing any bias to one particular group. I found it pretty inspiring to even attempt to find some of laws that are in place. As sad and seemingly ridiculous the old laws are for collecting water there is always a reason behind them.
Media Application (Score 1-10: 8 Points)
Media supports the story. Media use is effective and does not overpower writing or story core.
There were hyperlinks to this article to dove deeper into the law and other subtopics relate to this central theme. The words in the articles clearly supported the authors point of view and it was not necessary to link on all of the links (unless you wanted more information on the subject. There as a nice blending of information that kept the reader interested in the topic until the end of the article.
Total Score: 27 /30
Other characteristics this assessment fails to capture and how could this digital story be improved?
This assessment does not address the creativity or voice of the author. Due to the nature of the piece I do not think it was necessary to have a voice in this article Sometimes informative articles appear to be more impactful to me if there is not a particular side that the author is pushing. One major area that the author did not talk about much is what is to come with the future of the water in Colorado. There was more talk about the history that lead to the debate but they did not talk about the next steps. If a law to collect water is shot down what happens next? I would have been interested in the next steps in getting more support for the cause. Interviewing local residents on responses to this would also be interesting. Maybe not many people even care about the rain barrels I would have liked a bit more of a local tie in. Next up: who owns the clouds?