Drones Come Home response

               The science feature “Drones Come Home” manages to catch my interest through the title alone. Any possible threat to a person will be at least interest catching. The author starts off making it seem applicable to everyone, but then changes his description to apply to only hobbyists and the military, which are much smaller. This changes the view of drones as a threat to the public because originally they were of no threat to the public. The change in view on drones is what the author is targeting as the argument to be made. This change is what maintains interest throughout the beginning of the article. The rest of the article, however, maintains a similar voice throughout and does not hold interest as well. The author does not make the rest of the article as interesting as the first few paragraphs, which ultimately leads to the readers’ interest waning. The remainder of the paper has too many facts for the average person to enjoy it. There are so many technical names that each drone has and this narrows the audience to a smaller set of readers that will both understand and enjoy reading about them. The broad approach that the author went into his article with is diminished when he becomes more specific about plane types. The same message is in the writing, but it is shrouded by the technicalities. This gives me insight into an effective science feature because I have to choose an audience that I wish to interest and then I must maintain both the chosen audience and their interest throughout the writing. These facets are both integral to a successful feature because one without the other is degrading to the focus of the paper. Drones Come Home lost interest at the end of the paper so the message was not as focused as it could have been.