If the text might have been written in a different time or place or language or a different audience how and why might it differ?
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/nov/17/erasing-modern-slavery-is-a-slow-process-but-it-catches-on-in-australia
This opinion column, "Erasing Modern Slavery is a Slow Process but it Catches on in Australia" is written by Richarch Akland, a columnist for the Guardian. The text is about modern day slavery and the lack of human rights in Australia and how it is still widespread in the country despite its attempt to fix these inequalities. The issue is very relevant to todays time as this article might have been received very differently in another time period. The columnist is demanding human rights issues be solved, however had this been written in a time where slavery was still a common practice, this would have stirred up much controversy. Through the use of bias by diction, the author forms his opinion on human rights around the issues set in present-day context.
Which social groups are marginalized, excluded or silenced within the text?
https://video.foxnews.com/v/5826141833001/?#sp=show-clips
"The Truth About Illegal Immigrants and Crime" is a news clip from fox news wherein the crime rates of illegal immigrants and legal US citizens are discussed and compared. Throughout the report, illegal immigrants are marginalized and silenced within this text through the use of bias by statistics and bias by diction. Statistics are used to support the argument that the news caster is making. Additionally, words such as "illegal aliens" are used to describe the immigrants, this has the effect of dehumanizing and perpetuating false stereotypes on this particular social group. It is evident that bias is used to demoralize this particular social group in order to support the ideologies of the news network and further their conservative political agenda on the tightening of border control.
Comments
Post a Comment