Formal Academic Critique of “That’s Entertainment? Hollywood’s Contribution to Anti-Americanism Abroad” Laila Alkaf American University of Sharjah Formal Academic Critique of “That’s Entertainment? Hollywood’s Contribution to Anti-Americanism Abroad” Introduction In his article “That’s Entertainment? Hollywood’s Contribution to Anti-Americanism Abroad,” Michael Medved (2002) takes an extensive look at the effect of explicit Hollywood visions that penetrate every foreign society. “Medved is a famous radio program host in America, a best-selling author of a number of books such as Hollywood vs. America and The Hollywood Hall of Shame, he is also a film critic.” (michaelmedved.com, n.d.) Medved is considered to be famous for …show more content…
He uses hasty generalizations, and a lot of anecdotes from a first person and second person perspective. He also quotes dead people, from the 16th century, which is irrelevant to his article, confusing his readers. The author also quotes himself a few times, this makes him seem self-obsessed. Additionally, he mentions plenty of recent studies, and some of those studies are without references, hence, he does not support his facts. The author is bias and uses harsh, explicit language to prove his points. While reading his article, one can sense his sarcastic tone, and the fact that he thinks everyone is uneducated concerning this issue, which gives his article a bad vibe to the reader. Moreover, the author uses pathos, in other words an emotional appeal. This clearly indicates his feelings towards the topic, and the language he uses, tells the reader his personal thoughts regarding this issue that is bothering him. Never the less, there are a few strong points, which balances out the article, making it bearable for the reader. In addition, the author knows what he is talking about, because he is an expert in the media field, he has the authority to write about film studies, because he is a film critique. He also supports some of his facts with credible …show more content…
In addition, he lacks strong points and credible sources. If verifiable sources of evidence were used instead of his explicit opinions, and hasty generalizations were not made, this article would have been written much better. If these changes were made, readers would receive his opinion on this matter in a much comprehensive