This lengthy article talks about how homeless people sleeping in front of Melbourne's busiest street, called rough sleepers, have been arrested and forced out of that area to accommodate for construction. The author's diction is professional, qualifying the argument by interviewing both sides and providing an equal amount of evidence. The emotional connection the author has to this situation is more indifference than anything, since they qualified the argument about whether rough sleepers should be allowed to sleep on the street or not makes it seem like the author is a mediator and has no real opinion on this, or at least their opinion isn't expressed. The author appeals to the government's lack of credibility and how "'genuine homeless' people still outside the station would be offered accommodation and access to 'intensive' support services for two years." This claim is contradicted in a later interview with one of the homeless people they evicted who said, "she has been offered six weeks of accommodation but she would be back on the streets again soon after that." The author's purpose for writing this article was to provide a closer look at the homelessness situation in Australia, how the government is handling it, and the spectrum of reactions that the public has on the homeless. The article brings sympathy for the rough sleepers through pictures and personal interviews of them dealing with the police and the unwanted attention from the public. This article is very strong which surprised me because it came from such a trashy news site. It's lengthy and detailed, provides plenty of evidence, and even lists solutions that have begun to develop for the future.
0 Comments
|
Archives
May 2017
Categories |