For this review I, I chose what I thought was just a couple paragraph article found on the Native foods blog. However, there was an included article at the end of the native foods story that tied into it. I am including both in this review, since the Native Foods article refers to the New York Times article.
I chose this because it ties into my previous review, regarding vegans and protein.
Content understanding: 10
The informational content of this article is great. Facts and numbers are presented to give meaning and factual evidence to the statements made. Several sites are linked for more information and it is all presented in a easily understood format. Having statistics to back up the information gives the reader a way to relate the information. Just saying “the American population consumes more meat in 2000 than they did in the 1950’s”, doesn’t mean as much to a reader as “Although people have been told for decades to eat less meat and fat, Americans actually consumed 67 percent more added fat, 39 percent more sugar, and 41 percent more meat in 2000 than they had in 1950 and 24.5 percent more calories than they had in 1970, according to the Agriculture Department.” (Dean Ornish, 3/23/15)
Sense of audience: 8
I think the target audience for this article is defined well. The article is more for the meat eating population. Most people that eat a plant-based diet have probably come across this information at different times on their own. Not all, vegans/plant-based diet eaters do research on their own, but if they are like me they are excited to learn as much as they can regarding this topic.
Flow, organization and pacing: 8
I think the flow of the article was effective. Information was provided and then the article moved on. Topics were organized well. The order in which they were presented flowed logically.