VCE Stuff > VCE English Work Submission and Marking

[English] "Don’t blame me, blame Julia Gillard" language analysis

<< < (3/4) > >>

azngirl456:
*Note: there is no analysis of the videos as I analysed the articles as they would have appeared if printed out originally in newspapers. (We can only dream of the day when Harry Potter-esque newspapers become a reality)

The recent deaths from the Christmas island boat disaster has sparked controversy across the general Australian public and has raised issues about lenient refugee laws as well as the responsibility of the Labor Government. In response to this horrific tragedy, many newspapers have published articles to elaborate on this issue, such as the Herald Sun’s Editorial, ‘Gillard Government asylum policy now all at sea (16/12/2010)’ and Rob Oakeshott’s opinionative article, ‘PM must be quick with details about Christmas island tragedy (17/12/2010)’ in The Age Newspaper. The Herald Sun’s Editorial outlines that there should be reviews and alterations to existing refugee laws in order to prevent an increase of illegal immigrants arriving to Australia. On the other hand, Oakeshott’s opinion piece emphasises Julia Gillard’s role of Prime Minister and her imperativeness to elucidate details of the Christmas Island disaster as well as to appease any hysteria and conspiracy theories that have arisen. Both forms of media texts aim to appeal to members of the Australian society, particularly those who have a vested interest in refugee laws and the welfare.

Oakeshott’s opinion article is governed by his subdued and forthright tone, which reflects his professionalism as the independent federal MP for Lyne. As Oakeshott is a federal minister, his personal view that, ‘I don’t see a way, nor anyone outside Julia Gillard or key ministers, can value add,’ may be considered as of integral worth due to Oakeshott possessing knowledge of how affairs are dealt with in government committees. Readers are compelled to believe that Oakeshott’s opinions are credible and reasonable, especially his view that Julia Gillard should inform Australians of the recent Christmas Island tragedy rather than forming futile government committees. In the early opening lines, Oakeshott confronts his readers with the juxtaposition of ‘multi-party climate change committee’ and ‘multi-party Christmas Island incident committee.’ The former appears to readers as a reasonably sound and pragmatic committee that Oakeshott is ‘confortab[ly] being involved in [and] appreciate[ s] the opportunity to value add.’ However, the latter contrasts with this with Oakeshott mentioning that, ‘[this committee] is different.’ The audience is likely to feel displeased and confused towards Gillard’s proposal for a committee and her reluctance to inform the facts to Australians regarding the Christmas Island disaster. Oakeshott appeals to readers through the universal value of honesty which is evident in the statement, ‘and the point for [Gillard] to start is the truth.’ The writer follows up this statement with negatively connotated words such as ‘rumour,’ ‘hysteria,’ ‘xenophobia,’ and ‘conspiracy,’ which consequently elicits fear in readers that honesty is already compromised through Gillard’s delay of explaining the details of the Christmas Island disaster.

Similarly, The Herald Sun approached their editorial through a controlled and solemn tone in order to establish the integrity of their newspaper and to demonstrate their sensitivity towards the disaster. The writer describes the incident vividly, using words such as ‘desperate cries’ which is followed by ‘cast into the sea’ and ‘many drowned.’ Initially, the phrase ‘desperate cries’ may alarm readers that asylum seekers are in need of urgent help. However, the extent of the situation heightens when readers come across the phrase, ‘cast into sea.’ At this point, readers may emphasise with asylum seekers and their plea to survive in the harsh seas. However, hopefulness and the ability to help diminishes once readers have read that, ‘many [asylum seekers have] drowned.’ The writer aspires to build up empathy so that readers are placed in a mindset where they believe that appropriate action must be taken to prevent further refugee deaths from occurring. In the next few lines, the writer defines ‘real compassion’ as ‘not tempting asylum seekers to risk their lives trying to reach our shores’ in comparison with Government’s definition of ‘compassion for genuine refugees [causing them] to soften [Australia’s] immigration requirement.’ Readers are able to make the connection that if Australia needed to prevent the high surge of illegal immigrants entering the shores, the government’s lenient refugee laws must be altered. This editorial appeals to the audience’s sense of responsibility as it mentions that ‘the boat that struck the rocks was in Australian waters.’ The adjective ‘Australian’ reminds the audience that the Christmas Island incident occurred closed to home and many more deaths may arise if Australian citizens do not place pressure on the government to change refugee laws.

Rob Oakeshott’s opinionative piece and The Herald Sun’s editorial both feature the results of an online poll. Alongside Oakeshott’s opinion piece, a poll titled ‘Do you think establishing a multi-party committee to examine the facts of the Christmas Island boat tragedy is a good idea?’ shows that 64% of the people involved voted ‘no.’  The poll informs readers that a majority of people who took part are in favour of Oakeshott’s opinion. The audience is likely to conform to the dominant view that forming a multi-party Christmas Island Incident committee is futile and unproductive. A similar effect is achieved with the poll featured with the Herald Sun’s Editorial. The poll poses the question, ‘Should Australia open the door to asylum seekers to prevent further tragedies?’ with 88.52% of people voting ‘no.’ Again, readers are inclined to believe the editorial’s view that more strict refugee laws should be implemented.

Both media texts also pose a series of questions to their readers in order to illustrate the ambiguity of details regarding the Christmas Island disaster. The Herald Sun’s editorial questions, ‘How long was it waiting off shore?’ to highlight the possibility to readers that this incident could have been prevented if it were not for the current, ‘compassionate’ refugee laws. On the other hand, Oakeshott begins with simplistic questions such as, ‘How did a boat get so close to the island without being identified?’ to specifically questioning whether there were ‘…locals to valiantly make human chains to throw out floatation devices?’ Readers can understand that the latter reiterates a rumour that has arisen due to Gillard’s unwillingness to disclose facts of the Christmas Island tragedy.

Rob Oakeshott’s opinion piece and The Herald Sun’s editorial expressed their thoughts on the Christmas Island disaster in a calm and civil manner while remaining staunchly forthright. Oakeshott appeals to the audience through truth in order to convince them that it is Gillard’s duty to properly inform Australians of the Christmas Island disaster. The editorial in the Herald Sun used the approach of responsibility directed towards Julia Gillard and Australians to elicit the change of current refugee laws. The ideas in the Herald Sun editorial are likely to be supported and praised by those who would like to see a reduction of illegal immigrants arriving in Australia and prevention of further refugee deaths. However, the newspaper’s public opinions may be shunned by genuine refugees who will find it more difficult to prove their legitimacy if stricter laws are in place. While Oakeshott’s opinionative piece may be upsetting to supporters of Julia Gillard, it nevertheless sheds light into value of honesty and those who believe in moral fibre will favour Oakeshott’s view.

azngirl456:
please, does anyone know why it has come up as 'slashed'? i didnt put any slashes in when i was posting it up

azngirl456:
It's attached in word document below

but i would still like to know why it's slashed and how to fix it

_avO:
did u write [ s] (without the space) anywhere?

azngirl456:

--- Quote from: _avO on February 05, 2011, 07:08:27 pm ---did u write [ s] (without the space) anywhere?

--- End quote ---

oh yes i did, i'll go fix it and see what happens
thanks :)

EDIT: slashes are gone

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page