Paper 1 HL Practice Commentary

While many issues have stayed the same over many years, the way they are viewed has greatly differed. Text 1 is an advertisement from 1922 from a steamship company that is advertising their annual trips to "exotic" places like Panama and Cuba. Text 2 is an article from the Miami Herald in 2007 that discourages heavy vacationing and "developing" in the Caribbean Islands because of the poor living standards for people living there. Considering that text 2 is almost 90 years after text 1, it is clear that they will both have different viewpoints when it comes to this topic. While they both target the same audience, text 1 seems to encourage the audience while text 2 seems to discourage them. Comparing them from a post-colonial vs. colonial point of view then puts these two texts in context. While both texts target the same audience and refer to the Caribbean Islands, text 1 encourages the audience to look at these places in an overly exotified and luxurious manner in order to sell their product all through a colonial lens while text 2 takes a postcolonial perspective in order to downgrade the worth and extravagance of these “vacation spots” and discourage the developers in looking at these places as uninhabited and exclusive by using imagery to evoke an emotion of sympathy for the squatters.

Text 1 and 2 have a similar audience but a completely different purpose for both. Both the texts target upper class wealthy people who can go on vacation during spare time. Text 1 is from the 20’s while text 2 is from 2007, so although the target audience was the same in terms of wealth and privilege, their mentalities and actions are going to be different. Text 1 is encouraging these people to vacation in places like Panama and Cuba while text 2 is discouraging people from viewing these places as an exotic vacation spot and encourages them to look at these places as a home for people who are clearly struggling. In that sense, these two texts are placed in completely different contexts.  While text 1 over exotifies these places, text 2 is clearly trying to avoid that situation. Because text 1 is about 90 years before text 2, it’s hard to not view them from a postcolonial vs. colonial lens. While text 1 is colonial as the steamship is almost “selling” these islands and seems to disregard that there are inhabitants, text 1 brings down the luxury of the island by showing clearly that it is inhabited and should not be viewed as otherwise.  

Both texts refer to the same idea of vacations in the Caribbean’s but they both take a different approach and ultimately have a different theme throughout the passages. For text 1, “The Great White Fleet” has summer trips that go from New York to countries and islands on the Caribbean. It’s targeting a high class that goes on vacations like this usually and selling the idea of these islands. Text 2 is also talking about the Caribbean Islands but it is setting up a competition in the islands between the squatters and the developers. The developers being the exact people that text 1 is trying to sell to. With that being said, these texts then greatly differ in what message they’re trying to convey to the developers. Text 1 is highly exotifying and almost taking ownership of these islands in order to use the luxurious lifestyle to sell the product, which are vacations to the island. Text 2 does the opposite. The text tries to discourage the audience from viewing these places as if they have rightful ownership of them because at the end of the day, they are homes to people. The article downplays the luxury and excitement of the islands in order to attempt the reader to stop viewing the islands as if they have ownership of them. This clearly shows the contrasting themes in the two articles.

            Because of the contrasting purposes, it would be expected that the two texts will have opposite tones and mood. The tone and mood Is very different in the sense that text 1 is very happy and enthusiastic and text 2 tries to play with the sympathy of the reader by having a sad and dramatic tone. This makes sense considering the fact that text 1 is trying to sell a product while text 2 is almost trying to “de-sell” that product. In regard to text 1, the advertisement did not mention any people that may live there or any negative effects. So when talking to an audience who is expected to enjoy their time and have fun, it is obvious that the mood will be lifted and excite the audience. Text 2 then brings in the harsh reality that text 1 disregarded. When talking about something like displaced and poor people, it would only make sense for the tone to bring people down enough to persuade them to look at these vacation spots differently. Both of the texts aim to play with the readers emotions but while text 1 aims to lift their feelings, text 2 aims to instill a sense of sympathy and guilt into the reader. When talking about the squatters, there is a sense of pity. When talking about the developers, the tone switches to an annoyed tone. Considering the fact that the developers are the target audience, this would highly likely resonate with them more. Text 1 does the opposite by placing the developers on a high pedestal in order to use luxury and exclusiveness to sell their idea.  

            The stylistic features in both texts are similar but are presented in a different way. Text 1 uses a lot of visual and pictorial imagery while text 2 uses literary imagery. Text 1 uses a large picture at the bottom to excite the audience and make them feel the luxurious lifestyle that they can afford. Contrary to that, text 2 describes the story of the Jimenez family in sad detail in order to show the target audience the side that they are not on. In this sense, both of the texts use the imagery to sell their idea but the ideas that they are selling through imagery instill a completely opposite feeling in both audiences. The title for both texts is very emphasized and draws the reader in but text 1 uses the contrasting white and black colors to emphasize the title more. Both these texts use glittering generalities often. They over exaggerate some things and again, the only purpose behind this is to instill either a sense of excitement or a sense of guilt.

            Overall, both texts have similar audiences and various similar stylistic features, but contrast completely in their purpose, themes, and tone. This is ultimately to either up play or downplay the luxury and exotic appeal of the islands. 

HL Paper 1 - Structure and Introduction

Commentary Structure

Paragraphs 1 and 6 are the conclusion and introduction.

Paragraph 2-Audience and Purpose:

·         Text 1 from the 20’s, text 2 from the 2000’s-difference in audience and their mentalities.

·         Audience is the same- Wealthy people who use “exotic” islands as a vacation. With that being said, their purpose is different:

o   Text 1: Encouraging people to travel to these places for a vacation, exotifying the islands and encouraging people to go on vacations.

o   Text 2: Discouraging heavy vacationing, making these “exotic” places seem like homes instead of vacation spots.

·         Colonial vs. postcolonial lens.

Paragraph 3- Content and Theme:

·         Text 1:

o   “The Great White Fleet” has summer trips that go from New York to countries such as Panama, Cuba, and Jamaica.

o   It’s targeting a high class that goes on vacations like this usually.

o   Theme- Using a certain luxurious lifestyle to sell a product.

·         Text 2:

o   Squatters vs. Developers.

o   Emphasizes the idea that there is a competition between people who have homes in the “vacation spot” of other people.

o   While text 1 sells the idea that these places are exotic, text 2 shows them as homes that should not be considered vacation spots.

Paragraph 4- Tone and Mood:

·         Different tones in the sense that text 1 is very happy and enthusiastic in order to sell their idea while text 2 shows it in a very bad and detrimental light.

·         Text 1: In regard to the people that live there , they are very disregarded. The high class is treated well.

·         Text 2: There is a sense of pity when talking about the squatters. When talking about the developers, there is a sense of annoyance.

Paragraph 5 - Stylistic Features:

·         Advertisement vs. Article- both still used to sell an idea.

·         Text 1- Uses visual and pictorial imagery.

·         Text 2- Uses literary imagery.

·         Both using glittering generalities, plain folks, and manipulation.

·         Explain the visual devices in text 1 (font, color, pictures).

(Main ideas- Compare between audience and some stylistic feuatures, contrast between tone, purpose, and theme). 

Introduction: 

While many issues have stayed the same over many years, the way they are viewed has greatly differed. Text 1 is an advertisement from 1922 from a steamship company that is advertising their annual trips to "exotic" places like Panama and Cuba. Text 2 is an article from the Miami Herald in 2007 that discourages heavy vacationing and "developing" in the Caribbean Islands because of the poor living standards for people living there. Considering that text 2 is almost 90 years after text 1, it is clear that they will both have different viewpoints when it comes to this topic. While they both target the same audience, text 1 seems to encourage the audience while text 2 seems to discourage them. Comparing them from a post colonial vs. colonial point of view then puts these two texts in context. While both texts target the same audience and refer to the Caribbean Islands, text 1 encourages the audience to look at these places in an overly exotified and luxurious manner in order to sell their product all through a colonial lens while text 2 takes a postcolonial perspective in order to downgrade the worth and extravagance of these “vacation spots” and discourage the developers in looking at these places as uninhabited and exclusive by using imagery to evoke an emotion of sympathy for the squatters.

Rationale

Within this propaganda poster we aimed to employ the three devices of glittering generalities, testimony, and plain folks. Testimony was utilized in the form of a quote given by George Washington which greatly appeals to the poster’s sense of ethos, giving it great credibility by reference of this significant historical figure. The quote mentions ‘every country’ which correlates to the large image centered in the poster. Next to the globe, glittering generalities were used in describing knowledge as a key to ‘global peace’ and is a tool of ‘power’. The poster then makes a call to action below with its main purpose of advertising the hashtag #knowledgeispower which gives readers more information about the organization. Finally, the poster employs the plain folk device by extending the ability to be knowledgeable to ‘everyone’, suggesting that all have an equal opportunity to learn more and transitively attain power. Throughout the poster, there are variations of font size and color, the most bolded and attractive being the term ‘Knowledgeable’ as that is the main learner profile that is drawn attention to. It is the only term in red font color and is the largest relative size on the page, making it very memorable for viewers.

Propaganda and the Iraq War

"It is acceptable for a government to try to shape public opinion through information campaigns"

During the Iraq war, the political ideologies of different media institutions was clearly shown and became a topic of controversy throughout the war. Based on the cultural and political ideologies of where that specific institution is or who owns it, how the same news will be reported often varies. With that being said, there is a trend and relationship between the political ideologies of the country and the ideologies of the institutions that follow that country. Ever since World War I, it is not uncommon practice for a country to use the media to influence and shape what the targeted audience thinks. For example, during the world wars, Russia would have pro-Russia propaganda and the United States would show Russia as villainous and evil. During the nuclear bombings of Japan, the American people did not feel much remorse for Japan because during the entire war, the media has been setting up Japan to be an evil and antagonistic side. Although morally and ethically, it is wrong and unacceptable for a country to change the publics opinion via information campaigns, it is often something that is done today, especially in big cases like the Iraq War. Usually, the government aims to shape the publics opinion in order to gain the publics support by antagonizing the other side of the conflict, leading the government to be able to easily justify their actions. In the case of the Iraq war, a large majority of Americans believed that the Saddam regime was treacherous and that the Americans were helping the Iraqis achieve freedom. Some believed that the Iraqis were uncivilized. In the case of Jessica Lynch, the public believed that she was kidnapped by the opposing side and that she was mistreated and heroically saved by the American soldiers. Several sources later on revealed that that story might not be the case, some nurses from Iraq even went on to say that they took care of her as their daughter. This caused quite a stir because it could be a classic case of the government trying to twist the truth. The Jessica Lynch story gives the American government two things. Firstly, the Iraqis seem like rebels who are fighting against Americans. Secondly, the American soldiers seem like heroes. This obviously advances the countrys agenda and allows for public support. This whole thing will then distort the publics image of the war- something that America would want but would be detrimental in the long run. 

Media Bias- Pastiche

Rationale: 

The following pastiche will examine an article from Fox News regarding the Palestine-Israel conflict. This specific article shows clear favoring of the Israeli side and antagonizes the Palestinian side significantly. The pastiche will rewrite the article and change the bias to favor the Palestinian side. There will be vague information about the Israeli side and will only highlight and present the Palestinian side in a good light. The pictures in the two articles are also completely different seeing as the one on Fox News shows the Palestinian side as an evil side and the one on the pastiche shows the Israeli side as the bad side.

Original Article: 

From Fox News about Israel and Palestine- clearly favoring the Israeli side. 

Israel's parliament has passed a law toughening penalties against Palestinians for throwing rocks at soldiers, after a nearly two-month wave of violence that has seen almost daily Palestinian attacks on Israeli civilians and soldiers.

The law places a minimum sentence of three years on offenders and strips rock-throwers of their social security benefits, a punishment that applies to Palestinians in east Jerusalem. The parents of minors convicted of rock-throwing could also have their social security benefits annulled during the period of the offender's sentence.

Israel's parliament, the Knesset, announced passage of the law on its website Tuesday. The legislation was first introduced months ago, before the current unrest began.

On Wednesday, Israel police say a Palestinian was shot and killed after he rammed his vehicle into an officer in the West Bank. Police spokeswoman Luba Samri says the officer was seriously wounded in the attack.

The violence began with clashes at a sensitive Jerusalem holy site and quickly spread across Israel and into the West Bank and Gaza Strip. Eleven Israelis have died, mostly in stabbing attacks, while 70 Palestinians have been killed, including 44 people labeled by Israel as attackers.

"A minimum punishment is necessary to create a deterrent and uproot the assumption that `it's just a stone,"' said lawmaker Nissan Slomiansky, who sponsored the legislation. He said that "throwing a rock is an attempt to murder and there should at least be a minimum punishment."

Arab lawmaker Jamal Zahalka condemned the law, saying that "fires cannot be put out with gas, and this law is throwing gas on a fire."

The first fatality in the current round of violence was a 64-year-old Israeli who died after his car was pelted with rocks in Jerusalem as he drove home during the Jewish New Year.

Israeli leaders have accused Palestinian political and religious leaders of inciting the violence. The Palestinians say it is the result of frustration after nearly 50 years of Israeli occupation.

Modified Article: 

As the Palestinian side continues to defend itself against incoming attacks from soldiers, Israel’s parliament passed yet more penalties against Palestinians, after nearly two months of Palestinian defense against Israeli attacks.

The law takes away rights of the citizens by stripping the fighters of their social security benefits. Young and helpless children could also be punished because the parents will be penalized.

The Knesset, a parliament, announced the law on Tuesday. Even though the legislation was introduced months ago, Palestinians have only recently been facing heavy and unnecessary attacks that require self-defense.

A Palestinian was brutally shot and murdered on Wednesday. The Israeli police involved dealt with minor injuries.

The violence escalated at Palestines holy site, Jerusalem and quickly spread to further occupied territories. 70 Palestinians were murdered, 44 of them killed because they were defending themselves. Some Israelis also died.

 “We will defend ourselves against these unrightful laws designed to strip our people of their rights” said spokesman Mohammad Khalid. He also said that “rock throwing is one of the few ways the Palestinians can defend themselves”

Israeli lawmaker condemned the law and said that, “fire needs to be put out with water, and this law only throws water on fire”.

In this escalating violence, an old Israeli man died after his car interacted with several Palestinian fighters. On the other hand, 12 Palestinians died the same day from incoming fire from the Israeli offense.

Palestinian leaders have accused Israeli extremists and Zionists of inciting the violence and that this is self-defense against more than 60 years of violence. The Israelis say that the rocks are frustrating them.