From the outset, the article grabs the attention of the viewer through its eyebrow-raising headline. "War" and "Peace" are often held as opposites - the idea of a Peace Prize being awarded for a decision to engage in warfare would hence appear bizarre.
Indeed, the scepticism of the author is blatant. He takes care to distance the committee's views from his own, ensuring that their opinions are given as quotations. He goes a step further in actually contradicting the views in a manner that presents his own opinions as the correct one.
He attempts to discredit the award, for example, by mentioning the fact that it is not well-known, establishing that it does not have support from the government, and selectively bringing up information that paints its judges in a negative light.
The opposing stances of the author and the committee are clear. While the author's points are valid however, the way in which he presents his views makes the article appear to be a biased one.
Some areas that might be worth investigation could be how the ordinary Chinese perceive this event, as well as the rationale behind the government’s lack of support, taking into account the fact that the award was meant as a response to Liu Xiaobo being awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.
This response has moved into the terrain of reflection. You make claims about the author's choices and provide evidence from the article to back them up. The word limit prevents you from elaborating to the extent that I suspect you would like. This is an intelligent and perceptive reading. Well done!
ReplyDelete