I think both articles are written well. There was definitely an effort to present a problem from a different angle. In the first article most space was given to quotations from athletes and coaches. Moreover, people who are familiar with the issue and the most credible to speak about it. That gives a reader the opportunity to address his own perception. Some criticism of the article was fair. I agree that the topic was not fully disclosed and there was no in-depth analyses. However, experts and athletes’ voices could as well serve as the beginning of more detailed leads on the subject. Nonetheless, the way the author organized the story (the author’s voice rarely heard) and quotes, create the impression as if the author opposed Serena Williams and her body type of the rest of tennis players. Furthermore, it’s the weakest part of the piece. On the other hand, the author has tried to highlight the problem from all sides and to give the reader the fullest possible picture taking into consideration all interviewed athletes with different physique and stressing that the problem has a place to withstand.
The article about Taye Diggs has also received a lot of negative comments. Doing a profile story on someone is more difficult than writing about something generic and vague. To write about a straight black actor taking the role of gay on Broadway is very difficult. James Hannaham could expect a strong reaction of the audience. And, perhaps, taking this into account, he had to work on his approach more carefully. He tried to be funny and make the article interesting and not trite. But sometimes, too much is too much. Read “If you start to salivate when you hear the phrase ‘black men with jobs,’ then Diggs is your guy,” – and I can see why people got mad and offended at Hannaham. In my opinion, editors had to take few sentences out of his text.
In general, in America today, it is hard to find a chemistry among people. Different mentality, race, sexual interests cause resentment and rage even in minor things.