Evaluating the Credibility of the article as to Why Female Millenial Voters Support Bernie Sanders
For many millennial voters, choosing the best candidate that represents their ideals and beliefs is a difficult task to make. In this 2016 election ,there has been great increase of the number of millennial voters, male and female, supporting Bernie Sanders (the under dog) versus Hillary Clinton (the ideal candidate of the Democratic Party). What many people in political field noticed was the increase of female supporters for Bernie Sanders than for Hillary Clinton. In Megan Friedman’s article “Here’s Why Young Women Aren’t Voting for Hillary Clinton”, she interviews four female college students and asks questions as to why they support Bernie Sanders instead of Hillary Clinton. So, while Friedman is a reputable journalist, has the New Hampshire CNN exit polls and the CNN entrance polls, and a link to a poll conducted by Monmouth University to further her articles credibility [Friedman’s article is not credible due to the sources of who she has interview and where she has published her article: Cosmopolitan magazine, the online edition.]
To make an article credible, an author must use sources that have been vetted, have current information recently published, and accuracy of the subject at hand. *While Friedman does write about the current issue that have been affecting this country, her article looses credibility by using college students as sources to further her argument as to why more millennials are voting for Bernie Sanders and not Hillary Clinton. She interviews four female college students (Elizabeth Lee , Isabel Young, Megan Taylor, and Emmy Ham), and asks them why they support Bernie Sanders more than Hillary Clinton. One of the four girls Megan interviews is Elizabeth Lee, a 21year old college junior at Middlebury College and the head of College Students for Bernie,who explains why Bernie Sanders is a more appealing candidate to her.“…The idea of taking down Wall Street .… the most appealing part of Bernie’s campaign to me…to take down the idea of having big institutions that control your life and limit your choices about what kind of career you want to pursue.” The idea of paving you own career path and not being controlled by money is what many college students our age dream of doing and hopefully achieving one day. Part of Bernie’s speech on the idea of Wall Street is: “… breaking up the big banks, reform their corporate tax code on tax havens overseas, and get rid of tax breaks for oil, coal, and natural gas.’’ Elizabeth’s opinion on what Bernie thinks about Wall Street and her reason for supporting Bernie is that “ He doesn’t have strings attached to Wall Street and different interest groups…” Many college students, like Elizabeth and us, feel that the idea of having a president who will not be influenced by the powers of money will benefit “to what the actual majority wants and needs.”
The use of polling in a presidential election is one of the key factors that play in each candidates campaign platforms. *In Megan’s article she uses three polls conducted by the New Hampshire CNN exit polls, the CNN entrance polls, and the poll conducted by Monmouth University to show her audience how Sanders’ polling numbers are reflecting on the impact his campaign is making by cutting into Hillary’s lead in the Democratic Party as the number one candidate. “‘With a shrinking margin, a strong showing by Sanders in Iowa and New Hampshire could cut Clinton’s national lead even more.”’ Friedman uses Patrick Murray’s poll (Monmouth University) to show her audience the amount of support, and voters, Bernie is collecting in the two states with early caucuses. By referencing this poll in her article, Friedman gives her audience a source of information that undecided voters are still trying to figure out, “who do we want to vote for?”
Writing a political article is a difficult task for a journalist, especially finding a credible news outlet (magazine, t.v. network, or online website). *In Megan’s case, publishing her political article in the women’s magazine Cosmopolitan looses the credibility her main argument is trying to establish: why female millennial voters are supporting Bernie Sanders more than Hillary Clinton. Cosmopolitan (Cosmo) is well known magazine that “(…)include[s] articles on women’s issues, relationships, sex, health, careers, self-improvement, celebrities, fashion, and beauty.” When first launched in 1886 by Schlicht & Field of New York, Cosmopolitan was known for being a family magazine. Then under a new editor in 1889, Cosmo began introducing colour illustrations, serials, and book reviews. It wasn’t until Helen Gurley Brown became editor of Cosmopolitan in 1965 that the magazine was re-invented for a new demographic: the modern single career women. By publishing her article in Cosmopolitan, Friedman’s target audience are the millennial voters who range from ages 18 to mid 30s who read this magazine for personal and relationship advice. So, while Cosmopolitan does have political articles that readers can read and debate with their friends and colleagues, publishing this article in this particular magazine does not make it credible.
In this presidential election, many millennial are finding difficult to pick a candidate to support. In the Democratic party the two candidates left, Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders, are trying to persuade the undecided millennial voters, especially the female voters since they are considered the target group. In Megan Friedman’s article, she writes about the opinions of four college female students about why they support Bernie Sanders more than Hillary Clinton. Since many critics thought that female millennial voters would gravitate to support the potential first female president in our nation’s history than the first social-democratic Jewish president many were surprised by the amount of support Bernie Sanders was receiving from female millennial voters. While her article does point out credible sources of information and also describes true facts many know about both candidates, Megan’s article looses credibility of who she has interviewed and also where she has published her article.