Journal 2 - Van Williamson

For this journal, I decided to look at an article on Al Jazeera titled “UK: Polish man latest victim of hate crime surge. Up to 20 youths viciously attack Polish man in Leeds, in what police say was a racially-motivated assault.” Even though the news is (supposed to be) objective, there is still plenty of rhetorical value in this article. I think the main difference between Bitzer and Ebauer would see in this article is the way they interpret rhetoric’s scope. Bitzer would say this article was written because of an exigence, like the necessity of informing the masses via journalism. There are plenty of constraints guiding the writing, such as the Al Jazeera style guide, journalistic integrity, and a desire to be concise for the sake of the reader. Both Bitzer and Edbauer would recognize the role of societal values in this article’s conception and wording, but this is where Edbauer would expand on the influence of “structures of feeling.”

            Starting with something fairly obvious, Edbauer’s argument applies to this article in the sense that whoever wrote it was not in full control of the writing. Consider for a moment if the editor who contributed this piece was actually a pretty big racist, and felt enthralled by the hate crime. Imagine that said writer knew a way around his/her copyeditors and had the opportunity to post a different version of article, one that matches this person’s vile beliefs. I think Edbauer would argue that the vast network of processes (cultural, societal, political, etc.) would still prevent someone from publishing such an article. Bitzer’s idea of constraints is oversimplified, because there is a myriad of invisible influences that he doesn’t take into account. If the bold racist journalist had his/her index finger hovering over the enter key, but took a moment to consider their next action, I think the article would end up in the trash. This person would be fired, written about in every news source (including Al Jazeera making a gigantic apology and condemnation), and become a pariah in mainstream society. This action would make waves, but it could disrupt the secular waters enough to drown whoever went for it.