Comparison Language Analysis Please Mark! :)

[#chelsea123]

Hello, thanks for viewing... Here is my language analysis i need help on asap.
Please give feedback on what i can improve on and change. Thanks
The link to the article is:
http://www.theage.com.au/comment/price-of-acceptance-in-muslim-communities-in-australia-is-seclusion-from-broader-society-20151108-gktuym.html

Language Analysis
The recent Paris attacks have sparked a renewed interest in the increase of youth radicalization in Australia. In the newspaper article to ‘The Age’ November 18 2015, Anooshe Mushtaq appeals to her audience to understand the Muslims point of view with the issue of being drawn into radicalization, pleading for the community to change their views towards the Muslim youth who are being threatened in Australia vulnerably. In a more sarcastic and ridiculing tone, Mark Knight, a well-known cartoonist looks at the issue of radicalizing as if it were a machine, conveying the different stages of radicalizing Muslims. With both texts appealing to the wider community, but with different tones, the authors describe the various causes, such as the internet, which lead to the transformation of young Muslims.

Anooshe Mushtaq immediately instils a forceful but serious tone into the readers with the headline ‘radicalization: the tone of Muslim community discussion must change’. The use of the semi-colon portrays the authors simple message, while leading on to the subheading which also used simple language that appeals to a wide audience; the community. By opening with an example of a young ‘soft-spoken’ Muslim, the author uses juxtaposition against the radicalization that occurred when he walked to a police station and ‘gunned down’ an officer. This contrast in personality portrays the influence of Muslim mosques in Australia, early in the article. 

To draw the reader’s attention to the article, the author uses pictorial support with the image of two lonely women walking though the streets. Presenting the readers with the idea of being rejected to the community, the image links with the heading which aims to convince readers to change their views towards Muslims. 

Mushtaq uses a personal anecdote to describe the contrast in experiences in Pakistan to Australia. A readers response might well be to feel sympathetic and arouse a concern as she describes how she ‘no longer had the freedom’ when arriving in Australia. Her simple explanatory tone aims to illuminate her experience and make it receptive to the argument. The author seeks to draw in connotations with the word ‘prisoners’, to affirm in the readers mind, the urgent sense of needing to be accepted in the wider community.

 The author positions the reader to believe that Muslim leaders and imams have control over what the youth can do. In a dogmatic tone, Mushtaq states that imams ‘have the power to control the message’ to evoke readers to understand the effect in which religious leaders can have on the situation. To support her opinion, she uses repetition of the word ‘control’, to emphasize the power that leaders have over Muslims, making them sound vulnerable to being radicalized. Mushtaq’s use of hyperbole with language such as ‘instilled with fearful respect’ and ‘whether we agree or not’, implies the readers to sympathize with the authors argument, therefor persuading the reader in the authors favour.

Mushtaq also claims that social media is another big factor that is fuelling the radicalization occurring. In an intellectual tone, the author uses an expert’s opinion to support her argument. Aiming to appeal to authority, stating that the ‘head of ASIO’ was concerned with the ‘rapid speed of radicalization’, a sense of fear is influenced to the reader. The use of adjectives, ‘unavoidably’ and ‘subtly’ generates feelings of urgency with the reader by describing the unintentional effects of the engagement with messages.

In contrast to Mushtaq, cartoonist Mark Knight adopts a more sarcastic and ridiculing tone in his cartoon. Knight seeks to engender the readers support through the use of humour. By expanding on the idea of radicalisation, Knight pictures the various sources that are fuelling the transformation of Muslims. With the help of satire, Knight claims that the internet, alienation, violence and religious bile are being instilled into normal youths, by Muslim leaders which are creating terrorists.  Similarly to Mushtaq, Knight argues that radicalisation is being driven by Muslim religious leaders, although he uses a conflicting tone. Both texts increase the momentum of the debate over the threat of Muslims in Australia, as both seek to explain the cause of the radicalisation, with Mushtaq leaving the readers with the message that action needs to be taken to promote social cohesion.