How could the text be read and interpreted differently by two different readers?
This news article, titled “For Women Under 30, Most Births Occur Outside of Marriage” was written in 2012 and published in the New York Times. Overarchingly the article covers the increase in non-martial births within the United States, however with general negative connotations on the societal occurrence. Consequently, the diction of the text hints towards a conservative ideology, with such a group inhibiting traditional lifestyles; children being raised only under a marriage. Such is further proved through the author’s incorporation of two negative anecdotes, as to reflect the American single mother demographic as a whole. Therefore, bias is relevant throughout the text, however exampled through selection and omission. Moreover, the negative atmosphere created through the manipulation of the idiom “meanwhile, children happen”indicates that non-martial children are seen as illegitimate. However, as the New York Timesis slightly liberally bias, the text can be widely interpreted. Therefore, given a liberal reader, the text can be rather misinterpreted. Such as, it may be difficult to understand the underlying topics as presented through various forms of bias, which the liberalist does not value. Despite the need to provide news in a monotone manner, it is inevitable to reflect personal ideologies when conveying topics. Therefore, topics may have several connotations regarding personal perspective, leading to overall misunderstanding of today’s happenings.
If the text had been written in a different time or place or language or for a different audience, how and why might it differ?
Given that the contents of the news article centralize around modern American demographic patterns, it is primary that changing circumstances would affect the text. The news article expresses the increase in non-martial births since 2009, which is a relevantly recent occurrence. However, the authors hinted conservative ideology suggests a reality which was traditionally relevant. Therefore, the overall diction of the text would be similarly negative as written in a past time period of popular conservative beliefs. Similarly, if the text would to be written in a future time period, then the contents may be more liberal as such a demographic change would to become more prominent. The contents of the news article reflect the current state of America, however through the ideologic lens of the author. Language as well plays an important part as being a part of the authors cultural identity. Moreover, the author is influenced by factors such as audience, therefore with changing circumstances comes changing contents of the text.
Solid arguments for both introductions which I agree with. However, for the second introduction you need to identify the article that you are writing about. The first introduction is very detailed and you incorporate a good understanding of media bias and provide evidence for your theories. However, it is challenging to find the specific thesis statement for the introduction. You seem to have written it throughout the introduction, rather entirely at the end. You might also consider making your "who cares?" statement clearer.
ReplyDelete