Critical Analysis: Confederate Battle Flag Debate The Confederate battle flag has created controversy for quite some time in the United States. Many people claim it is a symbol of southern pride, but many others believe it is a symbol of racism and should be prohibited from being sold or displayed anywhere. Two articles written about this topic are on opposing sides, one written by Selwyn Duke titled “Keep the Confederate Flag Flying” and the the other published in The New York Times titled “Take Down the Confederate Flag, Symbol of Hatred.” Each article provides reasoning as to why the Confederate battle flag should or should not be allowed to fly. The two articles are targeted at the same audience, but have a differ in their persona, tone,
…show more content…
Both writers are targeting their articles towards Americans who have the power to to keep or take down the Confederate battle flag. For example, in Selwyn Duke’s article, he says “we haven’t heard a peep about the Roof family’s political leanings,” (Duke). By using the personal pronoun ‘we,’ Duke is referring to whoever is reading the article. While the New York Times article does not use personal pronouns, it still is targeting the same audience. For example, the last sentence of the article states “State lawmakers who must vote on removing it need to do that now and show the nation they understand the pain this symbol of hate and brutality causes to this day” (Take Down the Confederate Flag, Symbol of Hatred). This shows that the article is including the ‘nation’ and is not referring to a specific group of people. While the intended audience of the two articles is the same, the personas of the two articles differ. Duke’s persona is that of a sarcastic observer. He is very opinionated throughout the entire article and makes several sarcastic remarks. For example, he states “virtually all crime is the result of the philosophical/moral disorder known as ‘liberalism’” (Duke). While statements such as these show that Duke’s personality is sarcastic and light-hearted, it is possible that members of the audience feel offended by such remarks. The New York Times article is written more professionally, and the writer’s persona is the “informed authority.” While the two articles have the same intended audience, the New York Times article’s persona is more professional than Selwyn Duke’s, giving it higher quality and
Both writers are targeting their articles towards Americans who have the power to to keep or take down the Confederate battle flag. For example, in Selwyn Duke’s article, he says “we haven’t heard a peep about the Roof family’s political leanings,” (Duke). By using the personal pronoun ‘we,’ Duke is referring to whoever is reading the article. While the New York Times article does not use personal pronouns, it still is targeting the same audience. For example, the last sentence of the article states “State lawmakers who must vote on removing it need to do that now and show the nation they understand the pain this symbol of hate and brutality causes to this day” (Take Down the Confederate Flag, Symbol of Hatred). This shows that the article is including the ‘nation’ and is not referring to a specific group of people. While the intended audience of the two articles is the same, the personas of the two articles differ. Duke’s persona is that of a sarcastic observer. He is very opinionated throughout the entire article and makes several sarcastic remarks. For example, he states “virtually all crime is the result of the philosophical/moral disorder known as ‘liberalism’” (Duke). While statements such as these show that Duke’s personality is sarcastic and light-hearted, it is possible that members of the audience feel offended by such remarks. The New York Times article is written more professionally, and the writer’s persona is the “informed authority.” While the two articles have the same intended audience, the New York Times article’s persona is more professional than Selwyn Duke’s, giving it higher quality and