Brown backs votes at 16 in radical shakeup of politics

This subject regarding Votes at 16 is a controversial matter. Although people have their own opinion and speak about it very often, the facts are unexplained. This subject has already caused problems and discussions too among the Britains.To get a clear understanding about these articles I will first mention about the target audiences; the first one is aimed at people who have just hit 16, because it starts off by saying, “so you’ve hit 16” and the second is aimed at sophisticated people who reads the Timesonline (educated people, being more precise) as it mentions about complicated theories like “There is, of course no single age at which people reach maturity”. The third is aimed at people who are interested in politics and current affairs.This can be proved when it says, “Gordon Brown today signals …

owering the age of voting to 16 … alienation from modern politics”. All the above stated articles give different points of view about the subject and how Britain accepts them. Article one “Old enough to fight – old enough to vote? ” shows the reader how it will be and what the subject is about. The title itself is in the form of a rhetorical question and it has a harsh tone and a bit of violence and the readers can see this through words like “fight” which creates this tone to show that it is reader friendly and is in the form of conversational language.This article mainly gives people’s opinions and is completely different to the second one which is refering to the facts and hence it is has a factual tone.

Best services for writing your paper according to Trustpilot

Premium Partner
From $18.00 per page
4,8 / 5
4,80
Writers Experience
4,80
Delivery
4,90
Support
4,70
Price
Recommended Service
From $13.90 per page
4,6 / 5
4,70
Writers Experience
4,70
Delivery
4,60
Support
4,60
Price
From $20.00 per page
4,5 / 5
4,80
Writers Experience
4,50
Delivery
4,40
Support
4,10
Price
* All Partners were chosen among 50+ writing services by our Customer Satisfaction Team

The entire article is biased towards establishing the right to vote at 16. Conversational tone (chatty tone) is found throughout the article created by the use of words like “so you’ve hit 16”, it shows that it affects teenagers mostly (as it does) and that a serious message is being sent out to the readers. Also the above quote uses second person, this engages the reader and it positions the reader in line with the writers opinion.The writer has made this article as informal as possible to ensure that the target audience will read it; this can be seen in places like, “Serena Smith.. Wondered why:” where the writer mentions the person’s name. They have made it the most appealing to the target audience through the BBC website. Through this article it is explained why some people are “opposed to this idea”.

Furthermore, it brings together two viewpoints together at the end where it concludes. This article is quite informal but is in the viewpoint of a rationalist.It also tells the reader as to why young people are not allowed to vote at 16 – ” many are opposed to this idea, believing that at 16 you are just too young to make these political descisions”. This article is an argument but biased “for reducing the voting age”, and can be seen through statements like “Many politicians think this is a good idea”. This is a quite good persuasive text in favour for voting at 16 and ends in a factual note. The second article is less harsh but quite factual.

The title is just a statement rather than a rhetorical question.It shows less vioence and harsheness mainly because the it sounds calm and is a general statement about “song and dance”. It keeps the reader wondering as to what the article is about unlike the first article. It creates defamiliarisation.

It is also very different from the first as it does not use other people’s opinions through their own voice. So what does this article say about the voting age? Descriptive words and imagery are used to emphasize the message.For an example where it says, “website includes a picture of a bride whose wedding day appears to have been ruined because… shows how some people are already affected although it is a rare thing.

It also creates sympathy in the readers’ minds where it says that it had “ruined”. It gives the reader a – sorry feeling – impression and positions him in the centre where he will find it hard to be for or agains reducing the voting age. The flow of information is logicall; it goes on from mentioning about rights to the explanation of why different righs must be granted at different ages. So the reader would definitely see a pattern forming. This article has got rhetorical questions and two of them are against reducing the voting age.This is mainly because it explains that having the right to marry at 16 does not mean that many people are getting married at 16, because the parents think that they are quite young.

So this is for definite a persuasive text and is mainly achieved by the use of the two rhetorical questions at the end trying to sway opinion. These questions are meant to test our morals and emotions after reading what was before. When the reader is told that there is “no single age at which people reach maturity”, it makes it a hard decision for the reader or any other person to come up with a correct answer.This article ends in a questioning tone and note and is biased against reducing the voting age.

For an example where it says: “who would want to be tried by a jury of 16-year-olds? ” proves that it is biased. The questioning nature makes us to think about any decisions twice and it provides us with some evidence to help us as well. Because these articles show that people’s views can easily differ and based on what we have heard on tv, newspapers, family and friends it suggests that there is no right or wrong answer for most people and it can determine our view about the voting age.The way we were brought up will determine and influence our way of thinking about different things in everyday life.

Being more specific, people who were brought up to think that everybody is equal would align themselves with the first article and the the others who were brought up to think that decisions should be made carefully despite how equal everyone is, would align themselves with the second article. The third article, “Brown backs votes at 16 in radical shakeup of politics” is quite factual and it also give peoples opinions unlike the other two articles.It also gives statistics where it says, “community as small as 3,000 – 5,000”. This gives the professional opinions (Mr. Brown’s) as well and is not a persuasive text but a descriptive one. This article is more related to politics and is mainly focusing on that subject. In most places it is written in indirect speech; example: “he says Labour must be prepared to..

. “. The effect is that, it seems professional and keeps the gap from the reader mainly because it is meant to be a political related and hence should anyway look professional.This shows bias towards reducing the voting age at the beginning where it says “Gordon Brown today signals his support for lowering the age of voting to 16 as part of a radical programme to counter widespread alienation from modern politics”. This will create a good mood for the people who were expecting that and the people will feel like reading this more to find out what comes next. An example of bias can be also found in the statement where it says: “a new Britain is in the process of being born”.

It is biased for reducing the vote age and this is a strong statement as it is said by an important person. This article ends in a questioning note. Despite whatever we believe, as a society we cannot escape the different aspects of multicurturalism when it comes to this problem or any other situation where opinion matter. Teenagers need to be taught about rights and the influenze of getting different peoples opinions (through vote). First of the two articles are persuasive and does not fully give both sides of the argument.Eventhough all of them are different in styles: first two articles aim to persuade the reader and the next one to provide the reader with information to come up with their own answer.

First article depending on opinions, second on facts employ sympathy at some places. The third article is highly factual and does not force the reader in anyway. There is no wonder the society is confused over the debate on “voting age” as neither of the articles presents clear viewpoints and none of them cannot be seen as entirely true. So..

. how can the society form a clear view when different persuasive sources present different ideas?