Reading Analysis Of Two Essays

Douglas Rushkuff in his article Why we listen to what they say discourse about how the media coerce young adults and the youth to lie to themselves with discerning , confusing , non-conformist and irrational campaign ads . The purpose of the agent was to explicate to the reader just how the media manipulates its audience into buying something that they site with and how the genesis X has responded to their manipulations . While Misia Landau in her report on How media wildness touches children attempt to convince the reader that media military unit as back up by scientific seek are injurious to children . Rushkuff s (2000 ) debut of his ideas followed a cause-and-effect format wherein he first treated the reasons why media consultants and discoloration names changed the story of their ads and the message it sends , then goes on to discuss and give evidence of just how this changes coerced the viewing popular to order with the brand . On the early(a) hand , Landau (2001 ) utilise an effect-oriented format wherein she move 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 trance Rushkuff s interchange seem to be much of a conceptuality than evidenced by hard facts . Landau was probably trying to range parents in her report and she made a good lawsuit in it by giving examples specifically those involving children , patch Ruskuff by chance commanded to reach young adults or the youth pull through his style was to a greater extent inclined to readers with an academic orientation .

His parole where somewhat rhetorical and difficult to follow given that he tend to jump from one idea to the next , succession 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 aesthesis that they present the negative side of media , one violence the other is product marketing , they were also at the same expression that media is a powerful tool that can be secondhand and manipulated by other people to the detriment of children and a earthly 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 a rticle was diffuclt to browse in one reading . Thus , Landau is more in effect(p) 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 wishing 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