With this essay I found it to be rather easy to construct a thesis and organize my argument, compared to the previous two essays which were far less objective and focused on personal experience and ideas.  However, it was much harder to work through the material for this essay and deliver it to the audience while still balancing the Rhetorical analysis between both the academic journal and the magazine article.  The dense material was hard to sort through for relevant information at times, but after stepping back and evaluating the rhetorical framework of each article along with the purpose of writing this essay I was able to penetrate the text by looking for patterns rather than the information inside of the material itself.  Another problem I encountered while writing this essay was similar to the first, in that the difference between the amount of material in the journal, nine dense pages with graphs and charts to boot, was so much greater than the magazine article, two pages with larger font, that I struggled to find parallels between the two at times.  The solution to this problem was to find what did I find easier about the short magazine entry and then to look for opposites in the journal.  While writing this essay my perception of journalism changed, by rhetorically comparing the two articles and finding the deliberate decisions made by journalist Dina Fine Maron I saw the importance and art of journalism, as it translates topics I can hardly understand into something that I find interesting and can fully comprehend.  This also led to the introduction between my self and a new idea about authorship, while writing this I realized that we can’t know anything outside of our own experience except through translation, whether that be by spoken or written word, or even visual, and the author of that translation guides the narrative and content both consciously and unconsciously.