Below, you'll see any text that was highlighted with comments from the reviewer.
Message to Readers
Does this make sense? Do I need to change the order? Are the sources okay? Do I extrapolate too much? Does the ending work? Do I need more details? Is the tone objective? Do I sound like a foreign correspondent? I would love feedback.
I love the writer's careful and thorough way of drawing the reader into the article, but in a way in which the reader does not necessarily know it is happening. It's very subtle, which works well - very blatantly trying to evoke the pity of the reader is much less substantial in its impact than what this writer does - she introduces shared issues as links between the reader, who is distant from the situation, and those who are trapped within it, which allows us to be more emotionally involved. I also love her quotes - she gives personal information about the speaker she has chosen succinctly beforehand, which involves us more in what they are saying.
I think that what she needs to work on is structure - she has a wealth of brilliantly informative statistics but she has to make sure they do not hinder her formation of a strong structure. It seems often as though she is basing her text around the statistic - and, as someone who writes articles myself, I know how hard it is not to include something interesting that you've found out. However, it should not be to the detriment of a controlled piece. She needs to preplan structure more and have clear-cut sections, for examples an introduction, causes, consequences, solutions, predictions and conclusions. These should have even weighting. What can happen within this piece is that the writer can introduce seemingly unrelated things at random points, which can be confusing and stop the reader from following the thread of the story successfully.
I'd ask what their opinion of the West is, especially my country, the UK - the writer comments tactfully on the difficulties with money at the end, but I'd say that it's disgraceful when some people are going through this that, for example, we're spending £369 million of taxpayer money on repairing Buckingham Palace (which the Crown could pay for using just one year of profits) yet claiming we don't have enough money for international aid causes such as this
Your use of language is beautiful, you're clearly well-informed and you use statistics elegantly and in a well-integrated fashion. Overall, this reads really well and it's clear you're passionate about the cause. However, I would advise you to rethink the structure because it can come across as meandering at times.
Well done - I really enjoyed reading this lovely piece!