Link: http://www.advocate.com/commentary/2013/09/04/op-ed-what-fox-newss-problem-chelsea-manning
Fox News is often seen as an overtly-conservative media source, but freedom of speech is extended to all, no matter what their political views. Recently, they reached a new low by refusing to refer to Private Chelsea Manning (formerly Private Bradley Manning) using female pronouns and calling her by her proper name after she came out as transgender. Manning was convicted violating the Espionage Act by releasing classified military documents, and was sentenced to 35 years in prison, where she will most likely not receive the sex-reassignment surgery or hormone therapy. In a scathing, yet accurate, op-ed published in the LGBT magazine The Advocate, commentary editor Michelle Garcia criticizes the numerous insensitivities exhibited by Fox News anchors. She says that acknowledging Manning's gender identity is the "human" thing to do. It is clear that her purpose is to say that treating each other well is humane and morally right, and that Fox News does not do this by failing to refer to Manning as a woman.
This article is intended for those who care about either LGBT issues or about Chelsea Manning, since it rages against those who do not respect them. In order to prove that Fox News has callously dealt with the Manning story, Garcia gives the reader multiple examples of things that happened on-air. She writes "First, Fox News's America's Newsroom host Greg Jarrett continued to use male pronouns to refer to Private Manning after her announcement August 22... And then there was the gem where Fox & Friends teased a segment about Manning while playing Aerosmith's 'Dude Looks Like a Lady.'" (1) As she is trying to make a factual argument, Garcia's article cannot be seen as credible without examples like these; they serve to strengthen her piece. Garcia also uses pathos to appeal to her readers when she emphasizes her central point: "It's silly, right? Using the wrong gender pronouns for a person, when they don't like it. So maybe you shouldn't do it either." (1) As readers would obviously want to be treated kindly themselves, they'd be able to feel for Manning, for others in her situation, and for Garcia in her anger. When one feels an emotional connection to a piece of writing, one is more likely to accept whatever argument it is making. I think that Garcia achieved her purpose quite well, as she appealed to readers' emotionally by showing them her own outrage and supporting it with multiple examples.
No comments:
Post a Comment