It was Romney's debate to lose, And he did by Todd Graham
http://www.cnn.com/2011/12/11/opinion/graham-debate-romney/index.html?hpt=op_t1
The juxtaposition of the first and second sentences make it clear that the author is going to criticise Mitt Romney, but make it clear that he is not an awful politician, rather the juxtaposition points toward some other failing.
At the end of the third paragraph, the author uses slang to solidify how very obvious Romney's failure was. Although the author uses fairly colloquial diction throughout, his use of slang is still noticeable. In the second to last paragraph the author uses the word heartland, this emphasizes the lack of wealth and makes Romney's bet offer look extremely stupid.
The author includes direct quotes from Romney and Gingrich, but Gingrich's quote compliments his debating skills, where Romney's quote is used as a criticism. The author does not make it clear which politician he would prefer in the presidency but his view of their debating skills is clear.
Showing posts with label Close Readings. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Close Readings. Show all posts
Sunday, December 11, 2011
Sunday, November 20, 2011
Close Readings
http://www.cnn.com/2011/11/20/opinion/greene-candidates-appeal/index.html?hpt=op_t1
Our Untelevised Presidents by Bob Greene
The diction in Greene's article is key to understanding his feelings about the media and how it effects our choices in government. Words describing political awareness before mass media like "decipher", "distant", "indistinct", and "rumor" make it clear that Greene believes the mass media has improved our awareness. These words are also sophisticated causing the reader to trust Greene's opinion as fact however not so sophisticated that the average reader cannot understand allowing him to reach a wide audience. The diction surrounding a quote about the disadvantages of mass media is skeptical and negative; words like "believes" instead of "says" imply a lack of fact, and using "devour" to describe reading the newspaper makes the act seem uncivilized.
Greene includes many specific details about how presidents were represented in the public prior to mass media to show just how little the public knew about a president. Four entire paragraphs in the article are devoted to facts about who first what represented in each of the technological media advances. Specifically, Greene highlights that John Adams was never photographed in any way. Greene uses this to support his claim that every vote is a "leap of faith", but by including this detail at the end of the paragraph, we can tell that Greene considers the leap of faith to be less extreme now than it was in John Adam's day.
Greene syntax draws the eyes to certain sentences to highlight his important supporting details. The detail about John Adams follows three repeated sentence parallelisms. The John Adams detail is presented a two sentence question format, completely different from the subject verb predicate form used in the three details prior. The second sentence of the article consists of one word, "Again". This short sentence surrounded by lengthy sentences creates a less formal mood, perhaps even an air of superfluousness. This quickly grabs the attention of non-academic readers, and shows how well acquainted the public is with the candidates.
Our Untelevised Presidents by Bob Greene
The diction in Greene's article is key to understanding his feelings about the media and how it effects our choices in government. Words describing political awareness before mass media like "decipher", "distant", "indistinct", and "rumor" make it clear that Greene believes the mass media has improved our awareness. These words are also sophisticated causing the reader to trust Greene's opinion as fact however not so sophisticated that the average reader cannot understand allowing him to reach a wide audience. The diction surrounding a quote about the disadvantages of mass media is skeptical and negative; words like "believes" instead of "says" imply a lack of fact, and using "devour" to describe reading the newspaper makes the act seem uncivilized.
Greene includes many specific details about how presidents were represented in the public prior to mass media to show just how little the public knew about a president. Four entire paragraphs in the article are devoted to facts about who first what represented in each of the technological media advances. Specifically, Greene highlights that John Adams was never photographed in any way. Greene uses this to support his claim that every vote is a "leap of faith", but by including this detail at the end of the paragraph, we can tell that Greene considers the leap of faith to be less extreme now than it was in John Adam's day.
Greene syntax draws the eyes to certain sentences to highlight his important supporting details. The detail about John Adams follows three repeated sentence parallelisms. The John Adams detail is presented a two sentence question format, completely different from the subject verb predicate form used in the three details prior. The second sentence of the article consists of one word, "Again". This short sentence surrounded by lengthy sentences creates a less formal mood, perhaps even an air of superfluousness. This quickly grabs the attention of non-academic readers, and shows how well acquainted the public is with the candidates.
Monday, October 24, 2011
Close Reading #4
Why immigration uproar went nationwide
http://www.cnn.com/2011/10/24/opinion/singer-immigration-nationwide/index.html?hpt=op_t1
Details reveal some of the author's bias in the very first paragraph. She includes the negative impacts of the new Alabama laws both emotional impacts and economical impacts. This would make most readers sympathetic to the illegals right from the start. The fact that the population growth was more severe in the 90's than the 2000's also emphasizes the idea that the "uproar" is unnessecary and an overreaction.
The fifth paragraph contains one sentence, but it is full of meaning. The use of the word "ruckus" connotates a disruptive and unproductive, implying the reactions to immigration issues are disruptive to the American way of life and unproductive since there have been no real accomplishments in the area. The phrase "foreign-born populations" could be replaced with "illegals" or "hispanics", yet the author chose to use a phrase with very little negative connotations. The phrase is also quite elevated. That gives the immigrants a feeling of intelligence to the readers. It also implies that the issue isn't with only Hispanics which may quell some reader's feelings. All of this promotes a positive image of immigrants and therefore a negative image of the new immigration laws.
The second to last paragraph emphasizes the brokenness of the immigration system though syntax by finishing the first clause with the word "broken" and the second phrase of the sentence with the word "it" referring back to the immigration system.
As a whole the article stresses the negatives of cracking down on immigration.
http://www.cnn.com/2011/10/24/opinion/singer-immigration-nationwide/index.html?hpt=op_t1
Details reveal some of the author's bias in the very first paragraph. She includes the negative impacts of the new Alabama laws both emotional impacts and economical impacts. This would make most readers sympathetic to the illegals right from the start. The fact that the population growth was more severe in the 90's than the 2000's also emphasizes the idea that the "uproar" is unnessecary and an overreaction.
The fifth paragraph contains one sentence, but it is full of meaning. The use of the word "ruckus" connotates a disruptive and unproductive, implying the reactions to immigration issues are disruptive to the American way of life and unproductive since there have been no real accomplishments in the area. The phrase "foreign-born populations" could be replaced with "illegals" or "hispanics", yet the author chose to use a phrase with very little negative connotations. The phrase is also quite elevated. That gives the immigrants a feeling of intelligence to the readers. It also implies that the issue isn't with only Hispanics which may quell some reader's feelings. All of this promotes a positive image of immigrants and therefore a negative image of the new immigration laws.
The second to last paragraph emphasizes the brokenness of the immigration system though syntax by finishing the first clause with the word "broken" and the second phrase of the sentence with the word "it" referring back to the immigration system.
As a whole the article stresses the negatives of cracking down on immigration.
Sunday, October 9, 2011
Close Reading #2
Chris Christie and our biases about weight by Rebecca Puhl
http://www.cnn.com/2011/10/07/opinion/puhl-christie-weight/index.html?hpt=op_t1
I chose this article because we discussed this issue in my Government class as well, and I figured it would lend well to some cross curriculum thinking. I also struggle with this article because I know I can have some of these biases. Anyway, on to analyzing.
The very first sentence manages to characterize the authors opinion of media coverage of the obese. Her diction lends very nicely to making the media looked bad. The word "frenzy" makes the reader think of many things, maybe animals rushing toward a fallen prey or people shoving each other to reach a goal, but no matter what comes to mind, it's not positive. Again in the second sentence she uses diction for a specific purpose, but this time to support Chris Christie. She uses the word "deliberated" to describe his debate about entering the presidential race. The word "deliberated" is very sophisticated, a word only educated people would use normally, this suggests that the subject, Christie, is also well educated.
Also, in the ninth paragraph, Puhl emphasizes that thinner employees may not be healthier. The second sentence uses syntax to compare the possible health of obese and thin people. By using the same form, subject verb compliment, she compares the two compliments. The first of the two being an active life of an obese person, and the second being a lazy and unhealthy life of a thin person.
The entire article pushes for recognition of obese discrimination. The details offered throughout suggest that not only is legislation protecting the obese necessary, but also desired by the American population. By reporting details like, "81% of women and 65% of men expressed support for laws that would make it illegal for employers to discriminate against obese employees" (Puhl), the reader forms opinions more strongly in favor of the author's opinions. If the reader believes that most Americans wish to have such legislation, then they are likely to side with the apparent majority.
Overall, the author creates a forceful voice to entice the reader to believe discrimination against the obese is wide spread, unfair, and needs to be addressed.
http://www.cnn.com/2011/10/07/opinion/puhl-christie-weight/index.html?hpt=op_t1
I chose this article because we discussed this issue in my Government class as well, and I figured it would lend well to some cross curriculum thinking. I also struggle with this article because I know I can have some of these biases. Anyway, on to analyzing.
The very first sentence manages to characterize the authors opinion of media coverage of the obese. Her diction lends very nicely to making the media looked bad. The word "frenzy" makes the reader think of many things, maybe animals rushing toward a fallen prey or people shoving each other to reach a goal, but no matter what comes to mind, it's not positive. Again in the second sentence she uses diction for a specific purpose, but this time to support Chris Christie. She uses the word "deliberated" to describe his debate about entering the presidential race. The word "deliberated" is very sophisticated, a word only educated people would use normally, this suggests that the subject, Christie, is also well educated.
Also, in the ninth paragraph, Puhl emphasizes that thinner employees may not be healthier. The second sentence uses syntax to compare the possible health of obese and thin people. By using the same form, subject verb compliment, she compares the two compliments. The first of the two being an active life of an obese person, and the second being a lazy and unhealthy life of a thin person.
The entire article pushes for recognition of obese discrimination. The details offered throughout suggest that not only is legislation protecting the obese necessary, but also desired by the American population. By reporting details like, "81% of women and 65% of men expressed support for laws that would make it illegal for employers to discriminate against obese employees" (Puhl), the reader forms opinions more strongly in favor of the author's opinions. If the reader believes that most Americans wish to have such legislation, then they are likely to side with the apparent majority.
Overall, the author creates a forceful voice to entice the reader to believe discrimination against the obese is wide spread, unfair, and needs to be addressed.
Sunday, September 11, 2011
Close Readings
American Heroes Who Get No Credit by David Frum
http://www.cnn.com/2011/09/12/opinion/frum-unsung-heroes/index.html?hpt=op_t1
In the third paragraph, the author uses language to emphasize how Americans would negatively view politicians who pushed preventative measures. While describing a politician preparing for a terror attack such as September 11th, Frum says, "It's very possible that they would have been laughed at as tedious people who invested ridiculous amounts of energy against a probably imaginary threat." By using adjectives such as tedious, ridiculous, and imaginary, Frum clearly shows this politician as a mockery. Thus, he makes his point, such a politician would be a laughing stock, not respected, and unrecognized.
The diction in Frum's essay also heavily impacts the meaning, specifically his choice of unnecessary adjectives that change the meaning of a sentence. Frum points out that the politicians who get credit in the grand scheme are the ones that fix disasters. He uses Rudy Giuliani as an example, "The politicians who act after disaster reap the gratitude of the nation, like Rudy Giuliani amid the rubble of New York City." Using the verb "reap" instead of a more common world, like "get", gives this quotation a different feel. If you reap something you are taking it, not being given it. This makes it seem that Giuliani wasn't openly offered the credit, but took it anyway. This emphasizes that credit taken after a disaster isn't as deserving as credit given for preventing disaster.
Frum offers preventative solutions to past events, detailing how they would have been solved and could have significantly changed the course of history. He suggests that certain preemptive actions could have prevented The Great Depression, "Suppose they had rapidly infused the banking system with emergency credit, gone off the gold standard when Britain did in 1931, and organized the mutual forgiveness of the enormous debts and reparations left over from World War I." By detailing the possible fixes to The Great Depression, Frum shows that this changes would not have been widely accepted. Forgiving debts might have been extremely controversial if done too soon, before the country realized how bad the economy was, just as many preventative measures would be today. This furthers his point that some solutions may be unpopular, but that doesn't mean those solutions wouldn't work.
http://www.cnn.com/2011/09/12/opinion/frum-unsung-heroes/index.html?hpt=op_t1
In the third paragraph, the author uses language to emphasize how Americans would negatively view politicians who pushed preventative measures. While describing a politician preparing for a terror attack such as September 11th, Frum says, "It's very possible that they would have been laughed at as tedious people who invested ridiculous amounts of energy against a probably imaginary threat." By using adjectives such as tedious, ridiculous, and imaginary, Frum clearly shows this politician as a mockery. Thus, he makes his point, such a politician would be a laughing stock, not respected, and unrecognized.
The diction in Frum's essay also heavily impacts the meaning, specifically his choice of unnecessary adjectives that change the meaning of a sentence. Frum points out that the politicians who get credit in the grand scheme are the ones that fix disasters. He uses Rudy Giuliani as an example, "The politicians who act after disaster reap the gratitude of the nation, like Rudy Giuliani amid the rubble of New York City." Using the verb "reap" instead of a more common world, like "get", gives this quotation a different feel. If you reap something you are taking it, not being given it. This makes it seem that Giuliani wasn't openly offered the credit, but took it anyway. This emphasizes that credit taken after a disaster isn't as deserving as credit given for preventing disaster.
Frum offers preventative solutions to past events, detailing how they would have been solved and could have significantly changed the course of history. He suggests that certain preemptive actions could have prevented The Great Depression, "Suppose they had rapidly infused the banking system with emergency credit, gone off the gold standard when Britain did in 1931, and organized the mutual forgiveness of the enormous debts and reparations left over from World War I." By detailing the possible fixes to The Great Depression, Frum shows that this changes would not have been widely accepted. Forgiving debts might have been extremely controversial if done too soon, before the country realized how bad the economy was, just as many preventative measures would be today. This furthers his point that some solutions may be unpopular, but that doesn't mean those solutions wouldn't work.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)