The Media
Media is a Linkage Institution
Media is one of the most influential linkage institution because of how big a role media now plays in today's society. Media is everything, media is considered to be newspaper, television, books, YouTube and social media. All of these forms of media connect the general public with political parties that usually have their own platforms for every form of media. Once connected, political parties can essentially spew out information and propaganda to the public to influence their decisions on who to vote for. The media is also constantly updating people with current information about their favorite politicians and the status of elections. The two news sources that I chose were Fox News, and New York Times. Fox News tends to aim to reach conservatist and Fox News tends to aim to reach liberals. For both of these sources, I have found two articles that revolve around the topic of gun control.
Source 1: Fox News
Title: Mass Shooting Don’t Have to Be Inevitable
Author: Editorial Board
Date: November 6, 2017
News source:
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/06/opinion/texas-guns-shooting-trump.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fopinion&action=click&contentCollection=opinion®ion=rank&module=package&version=highlights&contentPlacement=1&pgtype=sectionfront
Unfortunately, on November 5, 2017, during a Sunday morning mass at the First Baptist Church (Sutherland Springs, Texas), Devin Patrick Kelley took the lives of 26 people and injured many more. As a result, John R. Lott, a columnist that specializes in guns for Fox News, published an article pertaining to the mass shooting. John believes that the claims made by the public, that an event like this calls for a change in gun laws, are unjust. The article discusses how changing guns control laws wouldn’t have prevented the mass shooting or any other that have occurred in the past decade. The shooter himself did not meet the standards to own a firearm but was still able to obtain one through a shop. The article also states that limiting the amount of magazines purchased wouldn't help either because creating magazines are extremely easy now-a-days thanks to technological advancements. Lastly, he wraps up his argument by stating more evidence that supports his claim
I do think that this article is relevant because it is covering a tragic event that occurred during this week. As sad as it is, mass shootings have been occurring very frequently which means that gun control and gun safety have been discussed fairly often by the public and government. I think that the author of this article did a good job at providing a fair amount of evidence that backed up his arguments. For example, the author uses a survey done by cops that asked them about their opinions on gun control and he also uses some statements made by the POTUS.
A bias that I have noticed in the article is that the author seems to speak from the perspective of a conservatives view on gun control. What I mean by this is that the author seems to believe that the gun regulations that are in place now are fine and shouldn’t be altered. He also believes that the problem is not the guns but it is the people that own those guns. This point of view on the matter of gun control relates very closely to the point of view of a conservatist. He achieves this bias by limiting the evidence presented in the article to only favor his argument. The author is able to do this by using allusions and hyperboles. An example of the use of allusion is when he refers to Trump who represents Donald Trump, our nation’s leader, a very credible man who should be trusted by the public.
Overall, the way that the argument was formed was nicely done. The argument is convincing because he doesn’t create a too outlandish argument and he was able to back it up with a decent amount of evidence. He also states and disproves some counter arguments that are made throughout the article. By doing this, he is able to convince me that his article is both valid and justified.
Source 2: New York Times
Title: Mass Shooting Don’t Have to Be Inevitable
Author: Editorial Board
Date: November 6, 2017
News source:
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/06/opinion/texas-guns-shooting-trump.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fopinion&action=click&contentCollection=opinion®ion=rank&module=package&version=highlights&contentPlacement=1&pgtype=sectionfront
The article first starts off my discussing the mass shooting that occurred in Texas and the shooter of that mass shooting, Devin Patrick Kelley. They then went into detail and described the mental state of the shooter and how even though he was not in the correct mental state, he was able to purchase a weapon. After this, the article starts to discuss the frequency of the mass shootings and how Donald Trump thinks that we the people should be focused on the mental health problem of others instead of altering gun control laws. They then end the article by giving awareness of the unnecessary amount of guns in America, the failure to tighten gun control laws, and the support of gun rights/purchasing.
I think that this article is very relevant because not only do they discuss an event that occurred very recently, but they also discuss gun control which is a very hot topic currently. The article is also published by the New York Times, a very well respected and trustworthy news outlet. Additionally, the evidence that is provided by the article helps convey their argument because they give information that backups the statements they make about gun control.
I think that the article is written in the perspective of a Liberal because their views on gun control were parallel to the views of liberals. Liberals believe that when it comes to mass shootings, we the people should advocate to alter gun control laws so that it is harder to purchase and carry a firearm. Although the constitution gives people the right to bear arms, they still believe that due to recent events, there needs to be some sort of change. Speaking of the constitution, this article lacks a counter argument because I think that they know that anyone arguing against them would bring up the 2nd Amendment, a constitutional right, something that is very hard to argue against. Just like the other author, this article has hyperboles and allusions that focus on what Donald Trump believes. They refer to Trump because he is a powerful person and when a powerful person makes a comment that does not favor your argument, that person will try their best to invalidate their argument which is seen in this article.
I believe that the article that is written is credible because they provide evidence that is relevant and supportive to their argument. For me, the most important part of an argument is the evidence, without evidence, an argument cannot be proven or made because there's nothing to back it up. In this article, the author uses examples from other mass shootings, quotes from the president, and logic to convey their argument. As a result, they have a created a well balanced and convincing argument.
Title: Mass Shooting Don’t Have to Be Inevitable
Author: Editorial Board
Date: November 6, 2017
News source:
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/06/opinion/texas-guns-shooting-trump.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fopinion&action=click&contentCollection=opinion®ion=rank&module=package&version=highlights&contentPlacement=1&pgtype=sectionfront
Unfortunately, on November 5, 2017, during a Sunday morning mass at the First Baptist Church (Sutherland Springs, Texas), Devin Patrick Kelley took the lives of 26 people and injured many more. As a result, John R. Lott, a columnist that specializes in guns for Fox News, published an article pertaining to the mass shooting. John believes that the claims made by the public, that an event like this calls for a change in gun laws, are unjust. The article discusses how changing guns control laws wouldn’t have prevented the mass shooting or any other that have occurred in the past decade. The shooter himself did not meet the standards to own a firearm but was still able to obtain one through a shop. The article also states that limiting the amount of magazines purchased wouldn't help either because creating magazines are extremely easy now-a-days thanks to technological advancements. Lastly, he wraps up his argument by stating more evidence that supports his claim
I do think that this article is relevant because it is covering a tragic event that occurred during this week. As sad as it is, mass shootings have been occurring very frequently which means that gun control and gun safety have been discussed fairly often by the public and government. I think that the author of this article did a good job at providing a fair amount of evidence that backed up his arguments. For example, the author uses a survey done by cops that asked them about their opinions on gun control and he also uses some statements made by the POTUS.
A bias that I have noticed in the article is that the author seems to speak from the perspective of a conservatives view on gun control. What I mean by this is that the author seems to believe that the gun regulations that are in place now are fine and shouldn’t be altered. He also believes that the problem is not the guns but it is the people that own those guns. This point of view on the matter of gun control relates very closely to the point of view of a conservatist. He achieves this bias by limiting the evidence presented in the article to only favor his argument. The author is able to do this by using allusions and hyperboles. An example of the use of allusion is when he refers to Trump who represents Donald Trump, our nation’s leader, a very credible man who should be trusted by the public.
Overall, the way that the argument was formed was nicely done. The argument is convincing because he doesn’t create a too outlandish argument and he was able to back it up with a decent amount of evidence. He also states and disproves some counter arguments that are made throughout the article. By doing this, he is able to convince me that his article is both valid and justified.
Source 2: New York Times
Title: Mass Shooting Don’t Have to Be Inevitable
Author: Editorial Board
Date: November 6, 2017
News source:
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/06/opinion/texas-guns-shooting-trump.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fopinion&action=click&contentCollection=opinion®ion=rank&module=package&version=highlights&contentPlacement=1&pgtype=sectionfront
The article first starts off my discussing the mass shooting that occurred in Texas and the shooter of that mass shooting, Devin Patrick Kelley. They then went into detail and described the mental state of the shooter and how even though he was not in the correct mental state, he was able to purchase a weapon. After this, the article starts to discuss the frequency of the mass shootings and how Donald Trump thinks that we the people should be focused on the mental health problem of others instead of altering gun control laws. They then end the article by giving awareness of the unnecessary amount of guns in America, the failure to tighten gun control laws, and the support of gun rights/purchasing.
I think that this article is very relevant because not only do they discuss an event that occurred very recently, but they also discuss gun control which is a very hot topic currently. The article is also published by the New York Times, a very well respected and trustworthy news outlet. Additionally, the evidence that is provided by the article helps convey their argument because they give information that backups the statements they make about gun control.
I think that the article is written in the perspective of a Liberal because their views on gun control were parallel to the views of liberals. Liberals believe that when it comes to mass shootings, we the people should advocate to alter gun control laws so that it is harder to purchase and carry a firearm. Although the constitution gives people the right to bear arms, they still believe that due to recent events, there needs to be some sort of change. Speaking of the constitution, this article lacks a counter argument because I think that they know that anyone arguing against them would bring up the 2nd Amendment, a constitutional right, something that is very hard to argue against. Just like the other author, this article has hyperboles and allusions that focus on what Donald Trump believes. They refer to Trump because he is a powerful person and when a powerful person makes a comment that does not favor your argument, that person will try their best to invalidate their argument which is seen in this article.
I believe that the article that is written is credible because they provide evidence that is relevant and supportive to their argument. For me, the most important part of an argument is the evidence, without evidence, an argument cannot be proven or made because there's nothing to back it up. In this article, the author uses examples from other mass shootings, quotes from the president, and logic to convey their argument. As a result, they have a created a well balanced and convincing argument.
Comments
Post a Comment