I looked at three of my classmates Twitter posts: Daniel, Katelyn and Leah. There are a lot of similarities between the three of them. Unfortunately, some of the information I'm about to share will be repetitive.
Daniel’s Twitter posts about last Saturday’s football game were the first I checked out. His first post in the first step of 1-2-3 filing answered two of the 5w’s. The first w was what; the second was where. In his words he says, “Schaefer's Passing causes Towson Loss.” The second step of the 1-2-3 filing explains all 3w’s/h. He says, “Quarterback Sean Schaefer threw four interceptions during Saturday's game to allow for a Richmond victory of 45-14.” He got to the point using active voice. By using active voice, he made the article seem more interesting, and it urges someone to read it. http://twitter.com/DanieljGross
Leah also posted something about the football game. In her first post she answered who and what happened immediately. In her second post, she explained who (Sean Schaefer), why and how (multiple turnovers) and what they loss by (45-14), but she forgot to mention when it happened and where. She also used active voice persuading the reader to actually read the entire article. http://twitter.com/lmarti10
Katelyn’s posts were about Towson’s Go Green plan. Her first post answered who (Towson U.) and what (Go green plan put into action). Her second post went on to explain when (December), why (to promote the RecycAll program), who (Towson U.) and how (by placing them throughout Towson campus). She fully explains the story using active voice. If someone just happened to look at that particular post, they would clearly understand the entire article. http://twitter.com/kmattingly