Exercise 24, p. 66: Free Speech Matters
Sample: Julia’s response to “Don’t Hold Our hands”! by Mr Jim Sattler
In responding to the government’s proposed online surveillance, two author’s (* watch apostrophes!) have different perspectives on who is to blame. Jim Sattler regards the government’s scheme as controlling and intrusive, which encourages the reader to decry this idea (what idea?) as it ‘goes against its freedom’, inclining the reader to believe that it is an ‘overkill’. (Explain the purpose: eg. anger, frustration etc.?) Appealing to family values and morals, he condemns the power that the ‘e-Safety tzar’ will have (use as a nominal, i.e. the tzar’s power) as it supposedly detracts from (undermines) the parental role. (Explain the purpose. Accordingly, concerned parents are likely to …)
Utilising himself as an example, (rephrase: “referring to his own parental experience”) Sattler allows readers to sympathise with his situation (please be more specific) , that a ‘grey-suited bureaucrat’ will oversee his child’s online world rather than him (himself as a parent; what is the concept here? And its purpose?) . He uses the metaphor of ‘holding hands’ to express that (this is a transitive verb and needs a grammatical object – not a “that” relative clause) the online sphere is just as present and real as the normal world, and so should have the same freedom. (This sentence is not clear: what is the grammatical subject of last clause? ) This also emphasizes (another transitive verb that needs an object) that the parent should be the one controlling their child’s internet use, as only a parent would guide their child. (Reinforce the purpose… purpose purpose impact )
- Julia, please follow the comments in brackets.
- You also have a tendency towards “summary” rather than “analysis”. (See p. 23.). It would be good to change the grammatical focus of some of the sentences in order to make them analytical. (See pp. 23, 26 and 37)
- Tendency towards listing: can you set up the concepts/”big picture”/key argument first, and the most important impact.
Compare the following response which starts with a focus on a common thread: intrusive nature of government rules versus civil liberties.
Scornfully and at times sarcastically, Mr Sattler draws upon his own parental experience to discredit what he sees as the Government’s intrusive proposals. The use of pejorative terms such as “e-Tzar commissioner”, “red tape” and “nanny state” taps into parents’ fears about excessive government control. Such terms would resonate with those members of the community who, like this author, prioritise freedom and civil liberties. Furthermore, the fact that such policies contradict the government’s “freedom agenda” imply that it is hypocritical. To isolate the government and further reinforce the intrusive nature of the Commissioner, the author conjures up an image of “religious busy body” figures and grey-suited bureaucrats. These terms consistently highlight the side-effects of a government intent on “stalking” online users, and encourage concerned parents to exercise their moral obligations towards their children.
See Exercise 24, Don’t Hold our Hands, Arguments and Persuasive Language
Return to Turn to Exercise: Orange Workbook“