201714702caic1819

[201714702caic1819]

The First Woman In The Whitehouse.

Could new blood claim the vote?

2020 is creeping up and to America, that means the call of the presidential election is getting louder. The candidates with the most attention appear to be the most familiar Trump and Sanders with an additional focus on previous vice president Joe Biden. However, one new candidate is building public attention to challenge the big names.

Kamala Harris.

She’s making a name for herself as someone who stands up for women and won’t accept anything but a straightforward answer, cutting down on filibustering. 

It’s hopeful that for the first time there might be a female president in the Whitehouse. However, even with her popularities in the polls rising to double figures, it’s likely that her forwardness will be interpreted as spitefulness. Her zero tolerance for the trump administration will additionally drag her down in the eyes of Republican voters, especially with her criticism of ‘the wall’ or in her words:

‘Trumps vanity project’

While Trump last election managed to have one scandal after the next and still make it to the presidency, Harris can’t afford to come off as unlikable. Trump's absurdity won him the attention that rewarded him with never being held accountable. Someone who’s shown responsibility, professionalism, and seriousness like Harris, takes only one slip up to bring their entire campaign down.

Even if America was ready for a black president, America might not be ready for its first female president in 2020.

[201714702caic1819]

I thought it was really interesting to look at the meaning behind the location of the summit and its relation to Trumps leadership style. I also like the final thought towards the meeting of two very different leadership styles and whether there’s been any real coverage of it, especially as the threats and conflict between the two leaders seem to have been forgotten.

Cavorting with Communists

The latest summit between North Korea and the US in Hanoi has left much to consider in terms of Trumps leadership style and how likely it is that North Korea will prosper economically after negotiations.

Heavily critiqued by many for his failure to reach an agreement at the summit, Trump has come under more fire for perhaps naively presuming that North Korea could prosper alike Vietnam in the 80′s after their free market reforms.

Trump has drawn many comparisons between Vietnam and North Korea during this time, one article going as far as to argue that Trump sees “Vietnam [as] the blueprint for North Korea.”

This same article gives an extensive analysis of various communist regimes and compares North Korea to East Germany, focusing particularly on the separation within both countries because of communist ideologies.

It is extremely interesting to watch the US’s relations with North Korea unfold considering the US’s consistently hard stance against communism and lack of sympathy for communist nations.

Moreover, this summit begs the question as to how effective Trumps leadership style is.

One interviewee on MSNBC remarked cuttingly that “to expect [Trump] to govern is sort of like expecting my pre-schooler to read Tolstoy; that was never what he was going to do.”

Is his unorthodox tactic of personal diplomacy a successful one?

And is Trump aware that the man in which he refers to having a great relationship with is actually an oppressive dictator?

[201714702caic1819]

Will summit ever change?

The Vietnam summit takes place, but did it make any real difference?

After the hype of denuclearisation and the chance to look behind the curtain at North Korea, everyone held their breath for the second summit between North Korea’s leader Kim Jong Un and President Trump, in Vietnam.

Before the summit could start the two leaders had to take some time to get to know each other with a brief 20-minute chat before having a nice dinner in the evening.

After their loving two days together, Trump described Kim Jong Un as ‘Quite a guy and quite a character’ but alas their date didn’t go as expected:

‘I think our relationship is very strong but at this time, we had some options but at this time we decided not to do any of the options’             – Trump

It seems as though this summit was dipping the toes in the water of a relationship, but their aims of denuclearisation appears to be moving too fast for the comfort of either side.

There’s been reassurance that there might be a deal in the future and that there’s apparently been progress in the deals that haven’t been made. However, these summits are starting to feel more like positive press for the leaders involved without consequences or real change in the initial issues meant to be addressed.

The president has stated he’d ‘rather do it right than do it fast’ but it certainly seems like dragging the process out rather than getting change made.

[201714702caic1819]

The Super Bowl: Playing The Game of ads.

Every year there’s the struggle for two teams to rise to the top, a fight like no other. They crawl their way up the ranks for that one moment of national glory, to compete at the Super Bowl. Finally, the big day arrives, as the game begins everyone waits tentatively on the edge of their seats, all in anticipation, just waiting for the moment when, at last, the adverts start.

The real fight that the international audience is there to see is for the limited space in halftime. The scrap pile of ads are so crammed together they’ve started to leak into each other, is it an advert for Old Spice? Or is it a tide ad?

And this year was no different, are you watching a Bud Light ad or the new teaser for the next season of Game of Thrones?  

It’s not who won the game last night that’s on everyone’s mind anymore, it’s that ASMR commercial and whether it should be deemed explicit? Or that Spiked Seltzer ad was sexist?

America has possibly reached its peak in consumer culture, as its citizens lay their time down at the feet of advertisers and why not? That possibly sexist advert cost $5 million for 30 seconds of airtime.

It’s become more than just products now, it’s become an art form. It’s no longer a commercial break but a collection of mini short films with almost academy level treatment in execution and reception.

[201714702caic1819]

Could Wrestling Transition Gender Inequality in Sports?

Is the division of sport by gender really to level the playing field for athletes? Or is it a highlighter to the unnecessary gender inequality that still lingers in America?

Mack Beggs, a 17-year-old transgender wrestler In the wake of winning a controversial Texas state girls' wrestling title.

Sport on the professional level has always been divided by gender with the assumption that it was levelling the playing field in terms of physical capabilities.

In the past many sports have, and still are, limited to men only, the inclusion of Women in many professional sports has only just begun to appear in recent years. The Olympics for example, are still catching up with their inclusion of Women’s leagues:

‘A hundred years after the introduction of freestyle wrestling in the Olympic program, worldwide wrestling entered a new era with the acknowledgment of female wrestling as an Olympic discipline on the occasion of the Athens Games in 2004.’

While there has been a pushing through of the barrier to merely include women at a professional level, questions surrounding the separation of leagues by gender have been raised.

The division is justified with the intention of ensuring an equal and fair physical starting point, an athletes’ ability is then assessed based on their effort and the standard of their training. 

This ‘standard’ starting point has raised questions when it comes to the inclusion of transgender athletes as well as highlighting the general consideration of cisgender people as ‘the standard’.

Transgender physical standards and acceptance are acknowledged by the IOC (International Olympic Committee) in their guidelines that state what stage of ‘Sex reassignment’ still allows for equal physical abilities when competing. The problem is the enforcement or rather the encouragement to make these rules at other levels of competition. While the IOC may be making progress slowly when it comes to gender equality they are at least pushing for the inclusion and encouragement of a more diverse range of athletes. 

Chris Mosier, the first transgender athlete to make a U.S. national team, is the star of Nike's latest 30-second spot.

However, the Olympics aren’t necessarily the federal law when it comes to athletic competitions. While their guidelines have been approved to clear the way for few transgender athletes, some are trapped at the starting line...

Euless Trinity (Texas) transgender wrestler Mack Beggs winning his second straight state title.  

18-year-old Mark Beggs is one such athlete stuck at the starting line of his career. Despite his female to male transition he’s still forced to compete in the women’s.  Even though by IOC and NCAA (National Collegiate Athletic Association) standards he would be allowed to compete in the men’s wrestling league.

According to Texas state law, Beggs is unable to compete in any other gender than that of the gender written on his birth certificate. Despite this, his determination and love for the sport, has shone through competing any way he can till he’s judged not by the gender on his birth certificate, but as the male athlete he is.

The Texas Association of School Boards specifically states that: 

‘Effective August 1st,2016, a UIL policy regarding gender specific sports requires Texas public schools to use a student’s birth certificate to determine eligibility.’

Making Mack Beggs in the eyes of state law a female athlete.

Mack Beggs, pictured during the final round for the Texas state girl’s wrestling title.

After an undefeated season ended with the winning of the winning of the Texas state girl’s wrestling title, Beggs has been met with a substantial amount of controversy from both competitors and their parents. Ironically, he’s been subjected to supporters and the opposition shouting that ‘he has an unfair advantage’, among more than a few inappropriate insults.

After facing significant backlash, Mack Beggs has voiced his disappointment that the focus is on his testosterone treatment and not the training he has put into the sport. He told ESPN:

"Like that kind of makes me feel like they don't care about my training or the work that I put in," he continued. "Because I've been to [state] twice. And it's not like I'm just doing this because I want to like call myself a boy and just dominate all these girls. What do I get out of that? I don't get anything out of that." 

The longer that he is denied his place in the men’s league, the more obviously wrong it appears to be to place him in the women’s. 

Not only are the rigorous training efforts of people such as Mack Beggs invalidated in situations such as this but the mental strength to keep pushing is tested. Mack Biggs himself was booed and jeered by crowds after his state win, and yet he’s found the will to keep training and competing for the sake of his love for the sport. 

He has, however, managed to show his enthusiasm and sportsmanship when asked about what playing in the men’s league would mean to him: 

"Boy's wrestling is hard. It's really, really hard. But I'll do it. If it means wrestling with the guys, I'll do it," he said. "It doesn't invalidate how I wrestle and how my technique is. If I get beat, I get beat. I just didn't train hard enough. I didn't work hard enough."

He’s brought it back to what sport should be about, the training and the effort put in by the athlete to be the very best at what they do, in both training and competition.

It’s not always the case though, that someone can keep going after facing such negativity and opposition, as well as such personal abuse. How many transgender athletes are stifled into giving up, or throwing in the towel for their possible careers? It’s no wonder that there are only a select few that make it professionally. Considering that transgender athletes have to not only face the conflict in their personal life, as well the possible physical transition, but they also have to fight their own state to compete fairly in the sport that they love and enjoy.

Vox posted an article following Mack Beggs’ first winning of the Texas state girls wrestling title highlighting not only the discrimination that Beggs himself has faced but also what it means on a larger scale. The video is embedded below:

This video, while not specifically about transgender rights in sport, talks to the common discrimination that transgender people face in their day to day lives that are dictated or controlled by their state; there are still state laws that discriminate against LGBTQ+ people. The state laws restricting transgender athletes from competing in the league fitting to the gender they identify with, is just a rabbit hole to all the discrimination that remains overlooked, pushing trans people to stay in hiding. Yes, the IOC and the NCAA might be making progress in their leagues and competitions, but until it is law, it doesn’t fix the heart of the problem.

Until it is recognized as discrimination by federal law or by the individual states, people like Beggs will remain the mythical underdog icon for those after them. They will set the example for the meaning of perseverance and sportsmanship, every time they push forward or make an achievement.

[201714702caic1819]

Reflection on my learning contract.

A homage to my experience of the ‘Contemporary America in Context’ module.

It’s definitely been a learning curve to learn about journalism and take part in it myself. I’ve realized that I personally need more practice in different styles of writing, especially more when it comes to reeling out more casual forms. Despite struggling with my own style, it’s been really interesting to witness the development of other peers styles. Having a dialogue with other people about their views or their writing has been really fascinating and an education in itself, whether that dialogue has been online or in person. Speaking of, I think I could’ve done with interacting more online! But the course isn’t quite over yet! and I’m sure the dialogue won’t end with the module.

As far as progression in my work, we’ll just have to wait and see how my long read goes to know /:)

[201714702caic1819]

There’s definitely an interesting larger appeal to the system of government itself over the power of the individuals within it. If the word count allowed it, the inclusion of a narrative as an example of the limitations to withdraw rights might’ve helped to support the article. Although I might disagree on the relevance of the trial, I think that it is a very valid point that Kavanaugh has been in a position of power previously and has experience. However, does the article not raise questions as to the effectiveness of the individuals that the public has chosen? If they aren’t implementing the values they see as important what are they doing?

Kavanaugh is on The Supreme Court- Let’s Calm Down a Bit Shall We?

Due to Kavanaugh’s appointment onto the Supreme Court, some media outlets would have people believe abortion will now be made illegal and, because of his court case, no woman will be treated fairly under the Supreme Court. What people seem to forget is that America is a democracy, not a dictatorship, therefore every decision that is made must go through a judicial process and no matter who is President, they have no say in the outcome of a Supreme Court decision. Yes, Trump has appointed two Republican Justices to the court, but it means that there is still an equal split between Democrat and Republican. I see no problem in this.

The Founding Fathers were determined to create a judicial system that was independent of political pressure so Trump, even if he wants to influence the Republicans on the court, will have no chance of getting the Democrat Justices on side to do his bidding. Also, Kavanaugh has been a Judge for twelve years on the Court of Appeal, so he has the correct credentials for the job. Surely that should matter more than a trial based on, unfortunately, accusation rather than evidence?

[201714702caic1819]

I really like how this article brings attention to the power that the public has to make the greater changes we want to see. I also appreciated how you addressed the issue without being consumed by Trump and how you approached his opinions with effective criticism. In making him seem more like another person with their own views, I think you helped in supporting your overall message that it’s the action of everyone as individuals that make the real change. 

Consumers first, Trump second

We all know that climate is changing, the leading scientists on climate change believe that it is a change because of humans. Donald Trump finally said that he believes climate change is real, but he is not sure if it’s manmade. He therefore doesn’t want to spend millions of dollars and jobs on preventing climate change. But should America wait for the president to fight climate change?

Can we say that Trumps failure to fight climate change is a crime against humanity? Is he to blame for the damages caused by hurricanes, wildfires and drought? I understand that he is the one who can make big changes but if we as consumers start small we can make a big difference. Because let’s face it we as consumers are also to blame. We know that the climate is changing but we are not yet doing enough. Just by looking at the pictures in an article of the Independent we see what will happen in the future if we don’t change anything. The article talks about a report that tells us to eat less meat if we want to have enough food in the future and save the planet. We have to change our diets to save the world, but we still like to eat our meat. Becoming vegetarian is just one of many examples that we as consumers can do to make a difference. Using less plastic, be efficient with our energy and pay attention to our water use are other well known, easy to implement examples.

We should start changing our way of living as consumers before we critize the president for not doing enough.

Be the change!

[201714702caic1819]

I thought it was a refreshing angle at the start of the article to discuss the reasons for Melania’s criticism from a feminist interpretation. It would’ve been interesting to read this explored further; the social backlash from the context of her husband. However, you did explore the multiple social issues surrounding her choice of decorations and the larger problems with the event itself. On the whole, the article was well structured, separating and ordering the focus throughout. I’d only say that maybe a subheading would help the reader to go into the article with a clear understanding of the angle.  

Christmas Chaos

Melania Trump has once again decorated the White House for the holiday season and it seems her stylistic choices have once again drawn intense criticism. A question to ask is, have her choice in decorations been attacked because they are peculiar and non-confirmative or alternatively because she is the wife of highly controversial President Trump?

With her job as first lady, the decoration of the presidential home is under her influence and care. In a video uploaded to Twitter, Mrs Trump is seen gazing at football decorations and walking amongst a sea of red trees, both have which attracted the attention of online trolls, regular people, and indifferent folk alike.

The 40 red trees seem to draw the most criticism, that they look like machines at a “car wash”, and wondering “How do wealthy people have such bad taste?”. Some people have even tried to link the exuberant use of red to Trumps affiliation with ex-communist Russia. However, many have come forth to support the First Lady, saying it’s the best they’ve seen – “Thank you, First lady for making the White House so beautiful”. Despite it being a select few.

A seemingly innocent and familial act of celebrating the Christmas season has also been targeted by many people protesting against the attacks upon migrants, particularly families with children at the Mexican border – that were tear gassed and shot with rubber bullets. Many deciding to use her tweet as an outlet for their anger, wondering how can she apparently be unaffected with her husband’s choices and choose to carry on obliviously.

[201714702caic1819]

Loved the way in which you draw the focus to a larger issue but still keep the subject of Melania’s decorations relevant! I especially like the attention to social media’s interpretation of the White House decorations. The way you utilized it to support your angle shows an interesting element of, not just factual, but social backing.

The Nightmare Before Christmas

‘Twas the night before chaos, when all through the house, Christmas trees were appearing, and the horror was being disguised.

Not even the joy of Christmas can seem to bring empathy to the White House. While the US-Mexican border was teeming with screaming children suffering from the choking affects of tear gas, Melania Trump was stocking the rooms full of gleaming decorations. Released via Twitter to the world the same day as the news broke over the migrant crisis at the border, the overwhelming Christmas explosion coincidentally clouded the media.  

In a desperate attempt to not disregard Trump’s latest mistake, the media have really pulled apart Melania’s efforts to lighten up the White House. It is in fact the rows of “creepy” red trees that have attracted so much controversy. Likened to the blood-stained corridors in Stephen King’s The Shining, the red trees are not distracting anyone from the terror present down South. Despite intending to symbolise ‘valour and bravery’, Melania seems to have been inspired by the hundreds of shootings that have plagued America this year. Even Christmas can’t keep the evil away.

Maybe 2019 will be the year Melania can restore the glistening joy of Christmas to the White House. We certainly won’t be rejoicing in the familiar Christmas feeling the Obamas shared with the world in 2016 any time soon. But then again, have the Trumps ever been that shining star spreading happiness to the world?

Better luck next year Melania.  

[201714702caic1819]

I particularly liked the way you constructed the title of this article, it gives the reader a clear idea of the subject and opinion of the following article. I felt the description of the book was well executed, though I agree that a focus on one subject would’ve helped give the article more of a specific angle. Overall I thought it read very smoothly and it held my attention effectively throughout :).

Michelle Obama’s new memoir is fast ‘Becoming’ a bestseller.

In her recently published memoir ‘Becoming’, Michelle Obama lifts the curtain around her life in a way she never could before – and after selling over 725,000 copiesin its first day on sale alone, it’s clear to see that her life as a former First Lady is a point of fascination for people across the world.

‘Becoming’ is Michelle Obama’s reflection on her personal journey from her childhood roots in South Side Chicago to life in the White House, retelling the early days of her relationship with Barack Obama and discussing the birth of their two daughters, who were both conceived through IVF (in vitro fertilisation). The memoir is divided into three parts: ‘Becoming Me’, ‘Becoming Us’, and ‘Becoming More’. The first section of Obama’s memoir delves into her childhood and adolescence, and its “textured discussion” of issues such as class, race and gentrification in South Side Chicago reminds readers of Obama’s education at Princeton University. The second section of the memoir, ‘Becoming Us’, recounts the beginning of her relationship with Barack Obama. Obama has always acknowledged the difficulties within their marriage, with her first pregnancy ending in a miscarriage – in talking candidly about her experiences with miscarriage and IVF, Obama highlights the feelings of loneliness and anger that struggles with fertility can stir. She describes her miscarriage in ‘Becoming’ as an experience that was “lonely, painful, and demoralising almost on a cellular level”.

In speaking candidly about her personal experiences, from IVF to the concerning implications of Donald Trump’s appearance at the end of her husband’s Presidency, Michelle Obama handles the topics with ease – making her memoir a true joy to read.

[201714702caic1819]

Decking The Halls Red This Christmas?

Melania Trump creates a White House that might not be far from the fantastical inspiration.

If the Trump presidency wasn’t theatrical enough, Melania Trump has succeeded in decorating the White House right out of a fairy-tale. However, the general consensus seems to be that the fairy-tale is leaning more Brothers Grim than Disney fantasy.

The central colour Melania emphasized this year was red, a colour that, while patriotic, has had a wide range of connotations especially this year. Many noted the hall of cranberry covered trees imitating that of the Handmaids from the dystopian America novel ‘The Handmaids Tale’. But the worrying comparisons don’t stop there! MSNBC’s reporting re-edited the White House’s released footage of the decorations to the theme of ‘The Shining’ and remarked at the eeriness at how well it fit the original editing.

Some have defended her choice of colour as nothing more than a bold ‘high fashion’ choice but others struggle to overlook the intensity of a blood red theme and what it represents. In comparison to last year’s white theme, the White House is at least sending a less white nationalist message.

However, it has been addressed that the country’s money might be better spent on the country instead of making a singular house look pretty, especially in the season for giving.

In some ways maybe, Melania did capture America in her decorations with all its contradictions. What could be seen as patriotic could represent something less prideful entirely.

[201714702caic1819]

Michelle Obama ‘Becoming’ a transparent role model.

She’s taken great professional strives but ‘Becoming’ marks her honest personal challenges that made her the women she is as America’s icon.

A portrait of Michelle Obama by Amy Sherald at the National Portrait Gallery in Washington.

‘Becoming’ doesn’t just talk about the struggles Michelle went through that anyone could see, she talks about her raw feelings blemishes and all. Doubts are key, she doesn’t forget or cover them with the success she’s had, and she looks deeper into the reasons behind them. With her position her concerns for America as country aren’t excluded from this personal memoir. She doesn’t shy away from her uncertainties with Barack’s presidency:

“Barack was a black man in America, after all. I didn’t really think he could win.” 

Her thoughts on race in particular play into her hope for America but she’s clear on the truths that many would shy away from for the sake of their image. She’s headstrong with her aspirations, as she is with her insecurities making her strong even if she has troubling times.

Her previously unheard of, miscarriage has received a lot of attention since the book’s release along with her use of IVF to conceive Malia and Sasha.

In discussing both of these subjects she explains the reason behind sharing her experience so publicly, there’s a stigma around such emotional experiences despite their commonality. Women go through these experiences that take such a blow to their mental health and yet it goes undiscussed.

Michelle is breaking the barriers of social politeness for the sake of personal and national progression.

[201714702caic1819]

A Nationalist America

The Pittsburgh shooting is a gun control problem, but it’s also a clear cry for America’s anti-Semitic, white nationalist ‘racial revolution’.

When it comes to shootings America has an automated response, there’s mourning, sincere apologies, and conversations on gun control but there’s a rise in understanding the social problem behind these events. Anti-Semitism is not the only discrimination that’s becoming an obvious public issue, but it’s the start of a discussion that’s dragging behind concerning events. From the Pennsylvania (NSM) Neo-Nazi rally in 2016 to the Charlottesville riots in 2017 proclaiming ‘Jews will not replace us!’ It’s unsurprising that it has led to an act of violence such as the Pittsburgh Shooting. Despite this escalation, the Government doesn’t seem to have an effective response and it’s concerning for the direction the country is heading. There’s never a clean-cut discussion on action but an argument of blame or a push for moral stances (especially in the lead up to elections). When the White House was asked about preventing these types of shootings from repeating it’s troubling that their response is that: 

‘If we had a good answer to that I think that everyone in the country would support it, if anybody knows the answer I think certainly this administration would be all ears’ -  White House press briefing with Sarah Huckabee Sanders, October 29th, 2018.

The Pittsburgh Shooting was not done by chance, it was rooted in a clear problem so why is there no practical prevention to a reoccurrence?  

[201714702caic1819]

More Money, More Climate Change.

There’s money invested in what Trump claims is a conspiracy. 

President Donald Trump gives a thumbs-up to reporters as he boards Air Force One for travel to Palm Beach from Joint Base Andrews, Maryland on Dec 22 2017.

Trump’s not wrong in claiming that climate change is an economic and political issue, especially since he has $9.2 billion invested in Yucca’s nuclear waste storage plan. But climate change never seems to be addressed directly or in some, even dire cases, not at all. The New York Time’s reported Trumps avoidance to even acknowledge the drastically rising seawater levels ‘already flooding Miami on sunny days’.

Even when renewable energy resources, that could save the country money, is addressed by the president, facts and statistics seem the least of trumps concerns.

His use of twitter as a platform for his policies seem to limit his arguments to statements, leaving the supporting evidence out of the discussion entirely. Yet, when Trump’s directly confronted with the scientific studies he seems to claim any and all ulterior motives. Whether it’s an inside conspiracy or China’s propaganda there never seems to be a source of reliability in the subject to Trump.  Putting aside opinions on the environment has Trump provided any legitimacy to his claims? Or are they merely ‘fake news’?

The Washington Post reported that despite Trumps own administration releasing a 500 page long environmental impact statement, the white house has not surprised anyone by their reluctance to comment on the subject. The Presidents reluctance surrounding the facts has begun to silence his own government. At this rate can America progress with a government sat in silence?

[201714702caic1819]

Is There a Conclusion to Kavanaugh?

We’ve heard this narrative before, allegations of sexual misconduct has become the familiar, with the boom in the #MeToo movement making it all the more evident. Whether it’s Bill Clinton, Roy Moore, Donald Trump or Brett Kavanaugh the claims are made as frequently as they are forgotten. It’s become so common place that it no longer seems to have an effect in considering the positions or moral character of those accused.

It’s more evident than ever that the impact of similar allegations are not being felt as much as they should, has anyone followed up on the president himself with the Stormy Daniels ‘scandal’?

‘Scandals’ are exactly what these accusations are seen as, they’ve become another form of gossip that might bring into question someone’s image but never seem to be validated or remembered after a certain amount of time.    

This gossip perception of sexual misconduct cases is happening as we speak with Dr. Christine Blasey Ford and Brett Kavanaugh. Ironically, Trump himself has stepped in to clarify Kavanaugh’s moral image, despite the lack of personal involvement in the case. The investigation as such, has become a game of who has a higher power than who is reliably trust worthy.

We’ve seen these allegations play out in the past, cases like the Anita Hill case that has resurfaced in recent news, but will there ever be an impactful conclusion to an investigation and not just a fading out of gossip in the media? Or will Government always be a world of ‘locker-talk’?

[201714702caic1819]

Biden Is Preparing for 2020. Can He Overcome the Hill-Thomas Hearings?

The New York Times: Alexander Burns and Jonathan Martin.

The effects of the sexual assault allegations against Brett Kavanaugh have rippled into the far corners of the U.S. Government, this article clearly shows that the continuing unfolding of events has led to new and old criticism for both Democratic and Republican sides.

While the article does at first use quotes from Democratic members, that in some way place the Republican party in a villainous light, the journalists never directly state their own opinion. In doing so, the journalists cleverly use references to angle the articles political leaning while not blatantly forcing their direct impression on the reader. However, the report, despite leaning left, doesn’t solely focus on the discrepancies of Republicans. It notes Biden’s involvement in the ‘Hill-Thomas’ case, a subject that has resurfaced with the recent allegations.

Despite starting the article leaning to one political side, it draws the reader in by offering a more complex understanding of the issues arising on either side. It does this by drawing on Biden’s attitude towards the ‘Hill-Thomas’ case in the past and his response to the Kavanaugh allegation at present. By contrasting these responses, the article draws forward the question of ‘Has he learnt from the past?’ A key point to consider if Biden is set on running for the 2020 elections.

By the end of this article, the reader has not only been provided with information and opinion but also a point to consider when looking into the events that are still unfolding.      

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/01/us/politics/biden-2020-anita-hill-kavanaugh.html?rref=collection%2Ftimestopic%2FBiden%2C%20Joseph%20R.%20Jr.&action=click&contentCollection=us®ion=stream&module=stream_unit&version=latest&contentPlacement=2&pgtype=collection