Ok so here is one of my attempts, I know it is not at a very high standard being so close to the exam but I have been trying to improve my context... so any feedback would be helpful :)
I know i tend to overuse vocab and stuff like that.. but let me know what you think
b]Solar Sellout[/center
In the opinion piece entitled ‘solar sellout’ appearing in a local Melbourne newspaper the author, Bob Walsh, asserts that the proposal by the mayor to charge a ‘greenhouse levy’ on all premises which don’t have a solar hot-water system by 2010 is an ‘inexcusable abuse of residents’ rights’ . Mr. Walsh writes in a sarcastic and angry tone which is quite personal, and aims to clearly outline why the proposal by the government is a bad idea.
Mr. Walsh manipulates the reader by using a series of techniques to convey his point of view. The first technique which stands out is the headline, and the use of a graphic. The headline ‘solar sellout’ is conveying the meaning that the proposal will be exactly that, a “sellout”. The photograph stands out instantly due to its size and placement on the page. It shows a figure that represents the mayor who is very large, and seems powerful cutting the power line. This representation is reaffirmed in the piece when the author speaks of the mayor as “an undeserving, lazy hippie riff-raff” The photo shows citizens handing over money to the mayor which is being put into his pocket, representing the levy as just giving the local government money. The headline and the photo position the reader to visualize what may happen as a result of the proposal.
The author uses a series of techniques to emphasise his point of view. By putting emphasis on specific words such as “hate” and “own” in italics, Bob Walsh supports his opinion, alongside this the author uses a range of emotive and sarcastic language. Sarcastic language such as “he’d rather rob the residents blind” and emotive language like “… become a captive of the radical environmentalists” position the reader to react emotionally and therefore allows the reader to understand the opinion of the author.
Throughout the piece Bob Walsh offers examples of statistics and expert opinion to support his contention. Statistics such as “The cost? $200 per house, and $500 per business!” position the reader to think of things in a logical sense, in addition to this they appeal to the sense of hip pocket. Appealing to the sense of money is a strong support because as people reader the piece they are possibly thinking to themselves that they don’t want to pay money. Along with statistics the author offers expert opinion from the Australian Greenhouse Office, stating that “everyone assumes that solar hot water systems actually reduce carbon emissions but they clearly won’t” he then goes onto say “house holds in Australia are responsible for around 17% of these and… hot water systems are responsible of #0% of this 17%... 17% of 30%=5.1%” This offers a great flaw in the governments plan and positions the reader to place doubt in the government.
The author ends his piece with another example of emotive language “if the mayor genuinely cared about the planet, he would be lobbying for more nuclear power plants, rather than squandering public money of frivolous solar panels” The use of this as the final statement leaves a lasting effecting on the reader, which leaves the authors contention as the last thing on the audience’s minds.
The author, Bob Walsh, effectively conveys his point of view. The use of photos, statistics and emotive language attempt to manipulate the reader to agree with the point of view which is clearly conveyed.
Word count: 566