Analyzing Suzanne Moore's Essay 'The Guardian'

Added Value Unit – S3 Essay

‘The Guardian’ has published many opinion based articles on current topics such as pop culture and politics, but when these main topics are get combined, many people have different opinions which causes many disagreements. The ‘award-show politics’ cross has had many controversial articles written about it. Suzanne Moore wrote an article named ‘The Fight back against Trump starts with Meryl Streep’s Golden Globes speech’ of which Moore comments on Meryl Streep’s speech, presented at the Golden Globes while accepting her ‘Lifetime Achievement’ award. Hadely Freeman also wrote an article titled ‘Celebrities get political at the Oscars? Give them an Award’ of which she recalled the Oscars and questions the realness

In the very first section of the Report, Suzanne Moore states that Meryl Streep’s speech was ‘typically brilliant’. The use of the word ‘typically’ tells us a lot about Meryl’s actions. When this word was used, ‘routinely’ was the first word that came to me, as Meryl Steep is a classic actor who routinely gives an amazing performance whether it is on the big screen or making a speech, which would explain why she was accepting the Lifetime Achievement Award. Moore later in the article changes her tone on celebrities speaking out on politics by saying ‘Or just more liberal virtue-signalling that doesn’t extend beyond the room or a social media echo chamber’. When reading this it would appear that this phrase is written in an almost fed up tone as these speeches tend to get made a lot, and they build hype but in the end no change is ever made. This where the term ‘echo chamber’ comes into play because just as if an echo is in a small room, every thing being said just bounce back and forth from wall to wall but getting quieter each time, Moore believes this with will happen on with Meryl Streep’s speech on social media, so in the end the speech will not be projected, resulting in just another one of Meryl Streep’s ‘okay’ speeches. But by the end of this article Suzanne Moore’s tone when writing on Meryl Streep’s

For example, in the first section of her article Freeman wrote that many celebrities have been ‘dabbling’ in politics. The use of the word ‘dabbling’ shows that celebrities don’t fully immerging themselves into the political conversation, but say just enough to make it look like they care. A bit further in to the text the opinionated writer wrote that all the Trump supporters will sneer at the ‘out-of-touch’ celebrities. The way this was written, it would appear that Freeman was saying that Trump supporters or fans (as Donald Trump himself would say) all see celebrities as being not in the political ‘loop’, even though they have been the people who have been giving the new President the hardest time. Moving further to the end of the article, >>>>>>>>>>describes the president as having an ‘insatiably needy’ ego. As we all know, Donald Trump jumps at any point to say that he is a billionaire so when he was described as being ‘insatiably needy’, I got quite confused but when we break down the words used the meaning is brought out. It is almost like Trump is being described as been addicted to being the centre of attention. This use of language shows the reader that Donald Trump see’ him self on a higher platform than the average person which is