Text A: Facebook status:
'Whatever good or bad comes our way, it is all from God. Sometimes, he rewards us. You're very valuable to God.'
Text B: Advert
L'Oreal 'Because you're worth it.'
Two of the texts I have chosen are both written, however they hold a different form. Text A is a Facebook status, and text B is an advertisement. These two texts hold the same primary purpose, as they both try to persuade each individual to make them feel 'worth it' or 'valuable'.
The most noticeable link between these two extracts are that they both seem to make the reader feel somewhat happy about themselves. Perhaps it could be that both of the extracts are building the consumer in their own type of way as both of the extracts contain 'you're'. As you can see the use of 'you're' constructs a relationship between the reader and the producer by attempting to make out as if the advertisment if directly forming a conversation between the reader and the producer. Additionally, the use of the contraction 'you're' breaks down to 'you are' so in certain ways the producer is trying to imply that the reader is something. For example, in text A the Facebook status is directly telling the reader 'You're very valuable' and similarly, text B immediately states 'you're worth it' so in certain ways, the producer of the texts are attempting to get the same message accross. Perhaps the use of the adjective 'worth' and the other adjective 'valuable' are the same synonyms.
Fairclough's notion of synthetic personaliation is noticeably used in these two texts. As you can see, the producer constructed direct address towards the reader in order for the reader to feel somewhat engaged and hooked to think that they are directly speaking to the individual, not anybody else. In text A, the use of the pronoun 'us' creates a rather intruiguing effect on the reader as it develops an engaging feeling on the reader to make them think that they are being rewarded as a whole, rather than just an individual. In addition to this, Faircloughs other notion of 'building the consumer' is widely used throughout the text B. To illustrate, text B directly tells the reader that they are 'worth it' which automatically triggers into the readers mind that they are worth it and highly valuable to society. Thus, makes the consumer want to go out and purchase the product that is being sold and advertised.
In conclusion, both of the two texts hold an ambiguous effect and enages the reader in their own type of way. The two texts has their differences but especially has theit own similiarities. For example, the differences are that they hold their own form, however similarly they hold the same meaning and message.
This is good. The connecting aspects are good - I would pick the most interesting to focus on (one that allows you to talk about the AFP and how it differs between the texts as well as one that is more precise thatn 'written'). You talk about the use of direct address to make the reciever feel special, so that is a very precise link that perceptively explores technique and content/purpose. You need to then look at how the relationship with the reciever is very different in the two texts. Your analysis of how the L'Oreal advert implies something about the reder that they want to apply to them and so are tempted to buy the product to prove that it does apply to them is good and how the weak relationship with the reader would be enhanced with the synthetic personalisation - it is important to make clear who they percieved to be telling them this (L'Oreal usually use an appealing celebrity who might be admired and even trusted), as the facebook status has the advantage of being posted by someone who is at least an acquaintance and maybe even a family member or friend and so that trust is implied in the status being from a known source - the reciever is more likely to share religion because we often choose to have close to us those who share our values (but not necessarily - the status assumes you will believe in God as otherwise the message would have no effect; this may be the case for some readers who would simply see it as a kind thought and take warmth from it, or who might be a little annoyed as it assumes a belief they might not have, in which case the response would run counter to the producer's purpose. N.B. The exam board prefer you to separate out power/gender theory from the grouping task, although you can get away with a mention e.g. of synthetic personalisation as a technique rather than as a concept. 'Building the consumer' might be going too far for the exam board's taste but well done for using it!
ReplyDelete