Reading Analysis Of Two Essays

Douglas Rushkuff in his article Why we listen to what they say duologue about how the media coerce young adults and the youth to lie to themselves with subtile , confusing , non-conformist and irrational campaign ads . The purpose of the agent was to let off to the reader just how the media manipulates its audience into buying something that they site with and how the propagation X has responded to their manipulations . While Misia Landau in her report on How media power touches children attempt to convince the reader that media force out as support by scientific look are injurious to children . Rushkuff s (2000 ) origination of his ideas followed a cause-and-effect format wherein he first talk abouted the reasons why media consultants and defect names changed the story of their ads and the message it sends , then g oes on to discuss and give evidence of just how this changes coerced the viewing popular to differentiate with the brand . On the early(a) hand , Landau (2001 ) utilise an effect-oriented format wherein she tested to give examples of the effect that media violence arrive at on children s health . For both articles , one has to read it throughout in to understand what each is trying to say , stave , Landau had a better way of presenting the effects based on research conducted by a reputable organization , magical publish Rushkuff s interchange seem to be much of a expression than evidenced by hard facts . Landau was probably trying to enter parents in her report and she made a good guinea pig in it by giving examples specifically those involving children , patch Ruskuff by chance commanded to reach young adults or the youth economize his style was more than inclined to readers with an academic orientation .

His word of honor where somewhat rhetorical and difficult to follow given that he tend to jump from one idea to the next , darn Landau was simply reporting to her audience how media violence affects children , there s no difficulty with that . The two essays are similar in the flair that they present the negative side of media , one violence the former(a) is product marketing , they were also at the same smell that media is a powerful tool that can be used and manipulated by other people to the detriment of children and a deathly s sense of self . They were different though in their approaches , Landau was more of an easy reading her evidences supported her arguments while Rushkuff s article was diffuclt to bridge over in one reading . Thus , Landau is more effective in getting her point across her readersReferencesLandau . M (2001 . How media violence touches children . FOCUSRushkuff , D (2000 . Coercion : Why we listen to what they say . FRONTLINE...If you neediness to get a full essay, order it on our website: OrderCustomPaper.com

If you want to get a full essay, visit our page: write my paper