http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324556304578122632560842670.html?mod=WSJ_WSJ_US_News_6
In a possible attempt to mourn the passing of an old and well-known company, this article covering the reasons for Hostess's end shows a clear bias against unions through the use of strong diction, selective detail, and imagery.
The article starts off with strong, positive word choice concerning Hostess, and this trend continues. The second paragraph describes Hostess products as "iconic treats", and Wonder Bread as a "pantry staple". Indeed, Hostess foods are rarely called anything but "treats" or "baked goods". The word "treats" implies sweetness and fondness, a rarity to be relished. The only counters used are mentions of consumer wishes for "healthier snacks", which implies only that the products are not living up to new health standards, not that they are any less than a favorite. Diction is also used against the unions. When courts and the Hostess company cut wages, the union was stated to "relent" in its resistance, as if they were harshly attacking the company. There is little harsh language when it comes to the companies actions against the unions.
Detail use in the article is extremely selective, making a point of how much the company is loved and how much it flourished, as well as taking the blame off of it. Union strikes were said to "affect roughly two thirds of Hostess's 36 plants, and made it impossible for the company to continue producing its baked goods". The damage that would be done to union workers was mentioned, but more attention was spent to Hostess. Notably, their "more than $2 billion in annual sales." By repeatedly mentioning the success of the company, it is shown in a favorable light, and the unions that participated with it are blamed for its failure.
The argument further praises Hostess through limited but effective use of imagery. One woman recalled that "her mother put Twinkies in her lunch", and a man desperate for Wonder Bread "left with two shopping carts full of the bread." These little stories bring to mind people who are fond of Hostess foods, and bring on a nostalgic feeling to readers.
I also read an article on this subject; it is interesting to see another view point on it too. I also noticed how the article I read is against unions, but I saw his talking about the Twinkies as a symbol for unions. As you said Twinkies are not healthy yet they are describes as sweet and sugary, and I thought that the same could apply to unions. Some people see unions as a hinderance to a company and therefore are bad, yet at the same time they help workers achieve better wages and working conditions, so like a Twinkie they are both good and bad. Anyway those were just my thoughts on the article I read, but I think you covered all the main points about the and you provided good examples to help support your claim.
ReplyDeleteI don't have much advice to offer for this, because I am not very good at writing these. Your analysis explained what needed to be explained well, without excess information. The only thing you could really add would be a conclusion, but it isn't necessary.
ReplyDeleteHmm, I like the points you bring up and I agree with you on your analysis. I think your last paragraph could be fleshed out a bit more. I like what you have but I'd like if it you could take it another step. How does that relate to the view of unions? While I understand that it seems relatively obvious to you, you need to make it more clear to the audience.
ReplyDeleteOther than that, I think you should probably add some sort of conclusion to it, though I'll admit that I'm terrible at conclusions so I can't really help you there... Great work, for the most part!