***I posted this question before but think it may've accidentally been skipped. I've deleted it and am posting again***
When you're making your analysis you might be able to slide this in. Something like, "Another prominent theme in the speech..." using the word prominent makes the significance known really seamlessly!
Hey there 
Not sure what "seeming portrayal" means. I think the sentence reads best without the word "seeming" - do you agree? You have answered the question, but what comes in the rest of your introduction will determine how well you are addressing the question. You've responded to the question and the module in your opening sentence - it's a wonderful sentence. But in order for you to explore the idea of corruption further, I'm interested to know if you'll be exploring this as a theme of the texts, or only the view that the author has the power. You'll explain this in the rest of your intro. Have you written that far ahead yet? Happy to have a look at that if so 
Oh thanks so much!
I get what you mean about the 'seeming' but what I was trying to communicate was that it isn't actually real. I guess it works the same without it though. For my core text I'm exploring corruption within the text as a fictional theme, and fir my related text I'm attempting to argue how the composer in a way exercises absolute power over the viewer in his representation.
Here's the rest of my intro so far, Is it effective/clear or a bit confusing in terms of setting up a markers expectations for the remainder of the essay?
When representing the complex relationship between people and politics, the composer holds absolute power over their audience, making a portrayal of reality inherently corrupted by subjectivity. Barry Levinson embeds his concern regarding political corruption within the blackly humorous narrative of ‘Wag the Dog’, where he engages in direct dialogue with his audience to warn them of the reality of political corruption. Similarly, Michael Moore’s 2004 documentary ‘Fahrenheit 9/11’ represents the corruption, manipulation and distraction within the Bush administration before, during and after the events of 9/11. However in this inherently subjective representation of political corruption, Moore abuses his absolute power as a filmmaker, thus corrupting his argument absolutely.
Thanks!!