Before talking about what a sample article review is , I would like to talk about the genre itself. After all, only knowing its specifics and understanding its features, it will be possible to write a truly competent journalistic work.
Review as an analytical genre
If you draw a parallel between this genre and any other, then for comparison in this case, a detailed annotation is best. They have pretty similar tasks. Both the annotation and the review are intended to tell the reader what this is about in a particular work (performance, film, article), why it is interesting, what features are remarkable. This genre also has something in common with a literary and critical article, since the writer must have his own opinion, his own idea, be able to correctly present the essence of the work itself and convey it to readers. This is not a review for which just the impressions of what you read or viewed are enough. Review is a multifaceted, complex and interesting genre. You need to be able to work in it. And therefore it is important to study more than one model of article review in order to learn how to apply theoretical skills in practice.
Component Reviews
So, you should consider what the review consists of. Its object is an artistic phenomenon that is created by some kind of art. In this case, a review of an article from a magazine is considered, so the journalistic work will be an aid to its writing. That is the phenomenon of mass communication. The article to be reviewed is the subject. Now about the main tasks. The author should not only submit an article, he must evaluate it, and from all sides, if possible. This is the main specificity of this genre - to consider the article from all points of view. This multidimensionality determines the complexity of the review. Such a goal sets itself unless a review (in terms of genre). It is important that the author is able to correctly correlate the informational aspect with the analytical, objective - with the subjective. If all this is observed, then, it can be said, half of the genre features are taken into account.
How to properly review
After the main features of the genre have been considered, you can proceed to the main part. Namely, the question of how to write a review of an article. This is a very important issue. And it’s best to give an example of a review of articles for clarity, describing the sequence of presentation of the author’s thoughts on paper. The first thing is the title of the article, the name of its author. After that - a description of the questions and the main problems that the journalist talks about in his work. It is worth noting that the model of review of a scientific article is somewhat different from the one by which reviewers work when describing journal or newspaper publications. However, the differences are small. If scientific work is considered, then affiliation, as well as regalia, should be indicated next to the title of the article. The third point is the degree of relevance of the work, and then the determination of the most important aspects of the publication. And finally, conclusions about everything that the reviewer said. The publication completes the information about the person who is the author of the review: his place of work, academic degree, title, full name, seal, and also signature.
Stylistic features
After the sample article review has been reviewed, attention must be paid to the intricacies of the process of writing a publication. It is difficult for many to begin to state their idea, however, guided by some tips and the above example, you can write really sensible work. Many aspiring journalists are concerned about how to write a review of an article. For starters, you should be guided by some tips from experienced reviewers. In the text, it is advised to use phrases such as “in the article, the author pays attention to such aspects as ...” or “he competently analyzes and fairly notes ...”, etc. Such phrases can not only relate sentences to each other, but also start new paragraph. Indeed, each similar phrase implies development: the reviewer can write about how the author perceives the plot, how he describes it, what techniques he uses for this, how rich his speech is, and it is replete with comparisons and comparisons. To write such a work well, you yourself need to feel like a reviewer, because only in this way it will be possible to understand the whole essence of the written work and convey it to the reader as best as possible.
Conclusion and Conclusions
Review is a very important part in any journalistic work. The author is obliged to systematize and summarize all of the above by him, moreover, as clearly and concisely as possible. The conclusion is best started with the words: “Based on all that has been said, it can be argued that ...”, and then directly conclude whether the article is informative and useful for the reader, whether its author clearly stated the essence, volumetric or not very, how good his style is spelling. In a word - to summarize everything and put, thus, a point.