Sunday, October 24, 2010

Mark Who?

I chose to analyze the MN Daily's article President Obama rallies the base in University speech. The subtitle of the article is "Obama was on campus to support DFL gubernatorial candidate Mark Dayton" yet when I read through the article, the only other time Mark Dayton's name was mentioned is; "Obama walked onto the stage after a brief introduction from DFL gubernatorial candidate Mark Dayton, whom he came to support". The subtitle to this article does not fit properly with what the article is representing. Just by reading the title and subtitle I would expect to be reading an article that describes Obama visiting campus and a description of what he said to encourage people to vote for Mark Dayton... this is not what I read. I actually kind of hoped it would include some of the positions that Mark Dayton has because I'll admit, I have no idea who to vote for because I haven't heard much about the candidates. But instead of getting some arguments from Obama supporting Mark Dayton, I read about Al Franken being there, some jabs he and Obama were taking at Bush, and various quotes from those who attended the rally. Although the article was not what I thought it was going to be, and the subtitle didn't fit, I can understand why the article was represented in this way. The article is written for the MN Daily, the campus newspaper. I would argue that students and staff from campus, no matter how much they support/do not support Obama, have a sense of connection and perhaps pride that Obama came to speak our university. When other students or staff read the article, because they feel this affiliation, will be interested in a description of the rally itself most likely more than they would be interested in an in depth analysis of the political issues discussed. Because the readers (audience) are interested in this type of portrayal, and the writers (authors) respond, the product is an article that represents the history of the rally and what it meant to campus instead of the history that containing lots of content on the speech and Mark Dayton's platforms that Obama supports.

4 comments:

  1. I totally agree with the pride factor of Obama coming. In my post I talked about how most people didn't even know why he was here (guilty) but jsut the fact that he was was awesome! It is interesting that the intended audience has so much to do with the overall product of the article. This was very very interesting! It definitely contrasted with what I read because mine was all about the actual fact that Obama was here in order to be a representation for Dayton! The connection piece is key and I think that this was a cool representation to analyze!

    ReplyDelete
  2. I found this interesting because it is contrasting to my article from the Pioneer Press that primarily focuses on what Obama said about Dayton. However, he never really mentioned what exactly Dayton was going to do/change.. just that he was a good candidate to vote for.

    I also like the comment about having pride in our university promoting the rally.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I think this article that the post talks about demonstrates a Hagelian/Rankean history. Obama is the "great man" as he is the president of the US, so the author of the article wants to focus on "great men doing great things." Obama is better known and more powerful than Mark Dayton, so Obama is focused on more than Dayton

    ReplyDelete
  4. The Daily did us proud. After reading all the major local papers, it was clear that we got more detail, more nuance and something that looked like an actual position in terms of what went on. THe history we 'made' was deeper.

    ReplyDelete