Can someone look through my Language Analysis please?

[jaygatsby]

Thank you in advance, I appreciate it very much
I don't have very flowy, intricate language, I know that already, so more about whether or not I stay on topic etc. Thank you!



Following a Time magazine article labelling the “Millenial” generation, the youth of today, as lazy and self-interested, Shirrin Peppin evokes in her opinion article (Millenials: Are We Really Just Lazy Kids, published 12 January 2017 on StudentVoice) several reasons as to what the media is misrepresenting the millennial generation. Using a scathing tone to criticise those who have a pre-conceived idea about millenials, and logical reasons to rebut their arguments, Pepin contends that millenials are unfairly represented and that the media should begin to see them for their positive qualities rather than generalising them in a degrading manner.

Pepin opens her piece alluding to a Time magazine article that describes milenials as “the most narcissistic, lazy, incompetent generation” and challenges the critics, asking the audience “Are we any different from those born before the age of smart phones?” suggesting it is the media who is merely altering the image of the younger generation. The idea that the media is “misrepresenting” Australian youth has implications that they are not doing an adequate job, while she is determined to “set the record straight” and show “more than what's represented by the media”. Here, she presents herself as an advocate for truth and degrades the media, positioning herself a higher state of moral authority over the media, and encouraging the audience to share her fair, truthful judgement. She continues in a personal tone “The misconception about millenials being ‘lazy’ is one I cannot understand.” In this manner, she aligns herself with her audience, millenials, and stands up for them, positions readers to view her on their side and regard her with respect. She extends her personal tone writing “our preference for Snapchat”, “our downtime” and the references to common activities of the younger population invites readers to share her opinion as she shares their activities. Pepin continues by introducing a common ‘misconception’ by Australian newspapers about “how easy high-school students have it these days”, then arguing “they seem to forget the other aspects that go along with being a teenager”. Again, degrading the critics by stating they “forget”, as well as making it clear her advocacy for teenagers, outlining several of their activities: “early morning band rehearsals, school five days a week, part time work”. The comprehensive list aims to rebut the claim of laziness, the exhaustive activities juxtaposing the idea that teenagers “have it easy”. It also aims to elicit some sympathy for teenagers who must participate in many activities, the load far exceeding what the mainstream press claims. Peppin uses their argument that binge watching is a sign of laziness, and claims they should be in actual fact justified for “watching Netflix” as down time “between all these other activities”. Here, she ultimately suggests the media places far too much significance on their Netflix watching habits over their other activities, reinforcing her contention that millenials are already under so much stress and do not deserve to be unfairly represented by the media.

Pepin makes reference to the fact that mainstream journalists “only ever seem to represent the older generation’s point of view”, suggesting that the youth are marginalised. She seems to challenge readers to question the media and dare to listen to the millenials’ point of view. She talks about video games as in actual fact, “additional intellectual stimulation” and the image reinforces this idea. Its caption “Today's means of reinforcing motor skills” aims to elicit the idea that the technology is of “today” and the view that playing video games is ‘lazy’ is an old-fashioned idea. This portrays the older generation not only as out-dated, but ignorant to the wealth of stimulation that video games can bring. Their outspoken, ignorant opinions forming the main part of media representation encourages readers to oppose this way of thinking, to realise that the media is one sided and biased. The writer seeks to tell an “untold story, ignored by the media” in her next rebuttal of the argument that young Australians are unemployed because of laziness. Peppin evokes that nowadays, the difficulty of acquiring a job is much greater than “in my parents’ day”. This aims to elicit sympathy for millenials, which contrasts the media’s unfair treatment of them, who “prefer to scapegoat millenials as simply being disinterested in employment”.  The contrast emphasises the media’s irresponsible portrayal, reaffirming Peppin’s perspective that millenials are misrepresented by the outspoken media.

Peppin finished by elevating the qualities of millenials: “Intelligence. Creativity. Quick-thinking. Bravado” in response to the idea that they “fail to express enthusiasm about doing menial tasks”. This aims to challenge the critics and employers who hijack the generation’s “greatest asset: self-confidence” by labelling it as “entitlement”. The writer concludes by directly addressing the media “to end this gross misrepresentation of millenials”. Her affirmative tone “we are not just zombies” emphasises what millenials have to offer to society which is overlooked by the media. She makes mention that millenials are “just trying to find out way in a highly-technological age”, underlining the idea that technology should be seen as a tool for users of today, not a source of condemnation of laziness. She ends with an imperative order “don't go belittling the kids of today” to drive home the disrespect shown to millenials by their misrepresentation, coercing readers to approach them differently and see their value.

Through a heavily critical tone to describe the media and their actions, Peppin argues that the representation of youth in the media is unjust and untrue. She highlights many unjustified, generalised statments the media makes and offers reasons that rebut them, encouraging readers to view millenials as valuable members of society, not the “lazy, immature, tech-obsessed” generation as described by the media.