Speech

" .. ,Justice is the most serious and important game of all, and the best side will have a better chance of winning if the rules are precise and fair and obeyed. But what matters most above all is that the result must never be a foregone conclusion ... " Compose and present a 6 to 8 minute speech in which you examine how Robertson reached this view on his idea of "the justice game" and how conflicting perspectives are presented. In you answer you must refer to one case, the Afterward, and to one related text that you have collected in relation to this elective. Consider this scenario It is said that there are two sides of every story. Robertson rectifies that there are conflicting perspectives; there are two sides to every argument. In order to win we need to play "the most serious and important game of all" but only the "best side will have a better chance of winning", and I assure you, it is not necessarily the good guys. Composers construct their own representation in accordance with their agenda and ideology and manipulate their responders to accept their 'conflicting perspectives' by the deliberate selection and emphasis of language and imagery. Geoffrey Robertson's The Justice Game and the documentary Fahrenheit 9/11 directed by Michael Moore uses various techniques to achieve their representation of the media as manipulative and self-serving, of the processes through which representations become accepted as "truths" and of the various influences and power figures in the delivery of "truth." Robertson's "Diana in the Dock: Does Privacy matter'" examines conflicting perspectives in relation to justice, about the law and privacy and the media. However, in presenting so his arguments are profoundly one sided as he skews his argument with language techniques to convince responders to perceive a particular end of the standpoint. Photographs exposed of "her exercising on a contraption called a legpress" to the media by her gym manager "caused such a deep humiliation and sense of violation that she determined to do something that had no direct precedent in British law." Providing background material for the case and describing the circumstances as well as the personalities involved demonstrates a sense of factuality of conflicting perspectives. In his opening chapter he utilises a central paradox in her relationship with the media - the desire to be sheltered "from the very world of tabloid editors and paparazzi which had become an essential feature of her life and, in due course, of her death". He indicates this paradox as her desire to be protected from what was "essential" to her and by adding "in due course" he suggests the inevitability of the media's role in her death. Robertson influences the reader to think that he is taking Diana's side when he tells us that "on her first visit she was assured by Taylor that her visits would be treated confidentially .... he had breached by taking the surreptitious photographs." However by juxtaposing this with a rhetorical question ("What he had done, by rigging up the secret camera, snapping her unawares and selling the pictures to the tabloids, was certainly sneaky and many would think there ought to be a law against it. But was there'") It corrupts the responders' first instincts and further convinces a different viewpoint. Further supported with an allusion to the "Faust myth" Robertson illustrates her relationship with the media as a "Faustian bargain" emphasising her death as a consequence of having sold her soul to the media. Demonising her royalty, Robertson delivers a rather satirical and irreverent tone by inquiring "what, Ms Windsor, is cardio-funk'" referring to her by the royal family's common name and thus demoting her status. Moreover he mockingly introduces her as "Her Radiance" further relegating her sainthood. His legalese is employed to further heighten his status which subsequently influences and manipulates the responder to accept his statement as he significantly demonstrates a higher authority status. Consequently, these latin words, "ipso facto" and "quid pro quo" extracted from the essay establish his credibility visually to the audience. Consider this taken from the afterward, "the best often go unrecognised because their genius is to keep their clients out of court rather than in it, or to produce solutions so acceptable that the problem is never heard of again." Robertson played his game by having settled the case out of court and as he believed, "the best side" had a "better chance of winning" with precise and fair rules obeyed. Satirically and ironically he lamentably expresses the missed opportunity to cross-examine Diana to expose further invasion of privacy. Attempting to set the scales he contrastingly concludes by expressing the hope was an enactment of privacy law. Through these conflicting perspectives, we are acquainted with different aspects of the case, coming to the deduction that Robertson is attempting to use Justice as a medium to provide us with our own interpretation to the end result to the case despite outweighing one argument against the other. Corresponding in a similar use of humour and wit Michael Moore's Fahrenheit 9/11 represents conflicting perspectives in the form of a documentary to achieve its purpose in conveying its meaning through visual techniques. Furthermore, creating a sensationalised representation it engages a wider audience in presenting its truth behind 9/11 and America's former president George Bush. Michael Moore has presented this film, dressed in everyday outfits to appeal to common viewers exemplifying his representation of George Bush by delivering conflicting perspectives to support his case. He declares that he is presenting the truthful outlook. He achieves this through omission by effectively distortorting the perceptions of responders into believing what he deems as truth. Attempting to deliver an objective portrayal archival footage and factual historical events are central elements within the documentary to support Moore's responses and attitude. However in doing so, it clearly shows signs of hatred and disapproval towards President George Bush as it selects particular sources to deliver that across. Throughout the film the extended metaphor of President George Bush as a child relates significantly to Robertson's demonised portrayal of Diana. The use of sarcasm in the opening "was it all a dream'" degrades authority of the election and consequently positioning audiences to look down on him. In the scenes thereafter Moore intercuts shots of various news agencies misreporting AI Gore's presumed victory in Florida and embarrassing retractions that George W. Bush had actually won. Moore's intent is to portray the national media as foolish and unreliable, and to get the audience in a cynical frame of mind. Alike what was presented of Diana the media ..... His visit to the primary school illustrates considerably Bush's actions mirroring children. Moore attacks him as he views Bush's actions as "photo opportunity." This parallels with "Diana in the Docks: Does privacy matter" as Robertson remarks about Diana's involvement in the land mines campaign and the "photo opportunities" at AIDS clinics in a deep cynical manner. He implies that Diana was motivated by a desire to shift her public image - "using the diseased and dying as visual props to make herself look better." Evident in "The invasion of Iraq" the image of the president is also demonised through satirical and cynical remarks. The chapter initially portrays an image of a missile followed by the president degrading his status. Moreover, by contradicting Bush's voiceover of Iraq's threat and the need to "free its people" images of peaceful civilians riding bikes and flying kites are emphasised. Juxtaposing this immediate graphic images of innocent civilians are displayed causing audiences to react and consider their perceptions on George Bush. The repetition of "never" in "a nation that had never attacked the United States, a nation that had never threatened to attack the United States, a nation that had never murdered a single American citizen" illustrates the innocence of the civilians in Iraq and thus degrades the president's status. The attacked show signs of anger and confusion as a hand held camera view one infuriated male cursing and questioning the justice in hurting those as innocent as infants. Conflictingly, soldiers are expressed and exposed with monstrous qualities through their interviews as they consider the invasion as "the ultimate rush." Satirically background music contrasting the images of the brutally burnt citizens conveys representations of conflicting perspectives. Subsequently Bush is demonised and deflated from his status strongly interconnecting with that of Robertson's treatment of Diana. " ... the justice game is not played for money but for people's rights and liberties." Moore urged to argue this as he stresses his attitude towards the president and his actions which has cost the lives of many. Making use of rhetorical questions alike Robertson's The Justice Game responders are subjected to believe what is portrayed by Moore.