Voting rights advocates plan economic boycott to pressure Georgia firms

I believe this story uses two of the five interesting elements including impact and conflict. This article describes the protests at the Georgia State Capitol from the new voting right bill and shows how these groups are planning to boycott corporations that are not speaking up for them such as Coca Cola. This shows strong beat reporting because Greg Bluestein was there in person to witness the protests and covered the event via Twitter, which he linked in the article. He also knows information about the bill, its components and is able to keep up with embedding changes. He describes that this story matters by saying the amount of people rallying with this protest and a new law to be passed affecting all Georgians as well as affected the corps being protested against.

Quoted: Bishop Reginald Jackson (direct), Marla Cuerton (direct), Coca-Cola (indirect)

Overlooked: Representatives who are pushing the billa and their reasoning for pushing this bill to pass and a statement from the corporation about the protests.

I do not think this story passed the Topeka Test because Bluestein did not explain the bill enough and who is in support of it. He probably realized most people reading the article would already know the components and supporters.

He does not show inherent bias, but he overlooked the key players for the bill, such as the elected officials actually passing it.

Bluestein used a summary lede and layed out the information in a straightforward way starting with the subject, verb and action. The nut graf serves its purpose by giving background on what the bill is and what kind of protests and boycotts are occurring. The best quote would be “We will speak with our wallets” because it shows the protesters are taking other measures to show their disapprovement of the bill.