User talk:Symode09/Speech

I have no idea what this speech is for, or who you are speaking to. Anyways, I thought i'd give my thoughts (constructive critism) on it as i saw it on recent changes, and I like unsolicitedly commenting on things. (But this is your speech, for some purpose I am totally unaware of, so my thoughts quite possibly are invalid as i don't really know the context).

Wikinews, like Wikipedia can be edited by anyone and, is based on the wiki mark-up language. In this day of sponsorship and syndication, it is almost impossible to find the latest news while knowing what you are reading is not just hearsay. On Wikinews, we have a team of committed contributors who regularly contribute and help to writing the latest news. Now when I say they are committed I mean that literally. I am talking about people sacrificing their girlfriends and boyfreinds, for people who stay up until 4am just to report on breaking news. These people are so committed to Wikinews, without it, they would pretty much be lifeless amoebas. I'm not sure which audience you are presenting to, but be careful with that last line. Depending on what your audience is, they may interpert that differently then you intend.

Many people ask, what makes Wikinews so good? Why should I go to the Wikinews website rather then the Reuters or the msn website. There are three reasons. Firstly, Wikinews contributors have already been to these websites, along with dozens more to find the best and highest of quality information to allow readers to get accurate and interesting reports. Secondly, in this world of syndications, as soon as there is a report on reuters.com, hundreds of thousands of other websites automatically post the same story. Simply go into any Google news subject and, at least half the stories are identical. Finally, break away from the pack! Instead of getting the same old news day in and day out, get something a bit more interesting, a bit more in depth, a bit higher in quality and, one of the only free news sources on the web.
 * Msn isn't really a brand associated with news, perhaps saying a generic internet portal, or mentioning some other news website would be more effective. I'm not 100% sure if Firstly is a real word, maybe First of all, or primarily would be better. You may want to go into more detail on how wikinews is better depending on audience.

Now, many people say how fair and balanced fox news is, I thought I might test how they treat professionals who they are interviewing. (play video 2) Be careful about ganging up too much on fox (although again this depends on audience).

You may be wondering why we are so comparing wikinews which is in print to fox news which is on tv. Today I have some good news. For the first time, we are publically acknoleging our work on wikinews video which should be coming out soon and unlike any other news souce, it will be the first free and unfree video news to be available on so many mediums. Videos will be available on MSN video, youtube, rss feeds, podcasts, the commons and on the wikinews sites. There will be one distinct difference between wikinews and the video edition - the video edition will have a deep look into one issue and have proper inverviews rather then many badly produced
 * First, Wikinews video has been publicly announced before (Broadcast, previous wikinews video stuff), so it isn't the first announcement. "it will be the first free and unfree video news to be available on so many mediums." Something can't be both free and unfree. I highly doubt it will be on the most mediums of anything. In fact I only count two mediums on that list, and I know news that has been published in more mediums then that (RSS feeds and podcast are essentially the same. Youtube msn video, commons, Google video, and what have you are all the same posting on an internet site to be viewed as a webpage).Bawolff ☺☻ 21:10, 26 October 2007 (UTC)