The Lead Sentences of the New York Times

I thought the lead in this article was effective. The sentence is very informational. It gives the reader the necessary information to know what the rest of the article is about. Who, what and when are all answered, leaving how and why to be explained and expanded upon in the rest of the article. The lead sentence also uses enticing vocabulary to draw the reader into reading more of the story.  The words used make the topic of the article seem urgent and important. This will encourage more readers to continue on with the story.

While this article also in the New York Times is short, it is very effective as a lead sentence. The reader gains an understanding of what the article is about in a short amount of words. In just one short lead sentence the reader learns who, what, when and where. Using a compact sentence can prevent the reader from getting confused by too much information. At the same time the words used captivate the reader. It dramatizes what is happening to entice the reader into reading more of the story.

In my opinion, the lead sentence of this article is not as effective as the others. It gives too much information and seemingly rambles. The amount of details given makes the sentence awkward. The lead sentence should only be: "The Turkish government said Monday that one of its fighter planes shot down a Syrian military helicopter that had flown into Turkish airspace." Just that part of the sentence tells who, what, when and where. The part that follows goes into how and why too much. It also turns the sentence into a run-on. I think that having a more compact lead sentence prevents confusing the reader enticing them to read more.