This commentary analyses the editorial text, 'Doomed to a fatal delusion over climate change', written by Andrew Bolt and was issued in the Herald Sun on the ninth of July, 2008. The purpose of this editorial is to convey a scenario that shows offense and disagreement to Kevin Rudd's and his advisor's, Ross Garnaut, campaign on the reduction of use on carbon dioxide. Thus, the reader is to acknowledge and agree to the purpose of the editorial. The techniques that the editor used to influence the reader included emotive language; statistics; hyperbole; etc. These techniques are to be further analysed to state what, how and why has it made the editorial more persuasive in a way to make reader think that 'Rudd's mad plan' is useless in accordance to Andrew Bolt.
This essay will critically analyse the editor's use of techniques throughout the editorial. One which is included are hyperboles. The editor uses hyperboles to enhance the exaggeration upon Kevin Rudd's suggestion on climate change, this allows the reader to think the worse of what could happen and therefore comprehends with the editor's approach to climate change. ' So almost everything depends on China and India copying us. But the chances of that? A big, round zero.' [line 44] is an excellent example of a hyperbole. Andrew Bolt has exaggerated on how useless Kevin Rudd's suggestion is towards climate change by deriving away from all the possibilities. He even mocks Kevin Rudd's campaign stating, "Wow. Pay more for food or die. Is that Rudd's next campaign slogan?" [line 20] This allows the reader to think that Kevin Rudd is only trying to make profit rather than make a change because he doesn't care about a rising death toll. ' The truth is Australia on its own emits less than 1.5 per cent of the world's carbon dioxide. Any savings we make will make no real difference, given that China (now the biggest emitter) and India (the fourth) are booming so fast that they alone will pump out 42 per cent of the world's greenhouse gases by 2030' but as Andrew Bolt has stated, everything must depend on China and India copying Australia. He also stated, "But the chances of that? A big, round zero." This has effectively given up hope to Kevin Rudd's campaign towards reducing the effects of climate change.
Another technique to be analysed would be emotive language it is used in the editorial to bring the reader to a point where they feel sympathetic to the editor's response and his views to understand the concept of which Kevin Rudd's suggestions have affected him and may also affect the reader. ' "The patient had also developed the belief that, due to climate change, his own water consumption could lead within days to the deaths of millions of people through exhaustion of water supplies." But never mind the poor boy, who became too terrified even to drink. What's scarier is that people in charge of our Government seem to suffer from this "climate change delusion", too.' [line 9-12]. This may scare the reader as it compares the actions of a 17 year old male to the Government. The editor is trying to say that if the worse could happen to a 17 year old male, the Government may overreact. He then includes a quote that had horrified himself, "Australians must pay more for petrol, food and energy or ultimately face a rising death toll . . ." [line 18-19]. This quote backs up the overreaction of the Government towards climate change as they have already stated that Australia must pay more face a death toll. This alarms the reader to think that the Government has already given up every other alternative except for raising prices. Andrew Bolt allows the reader to think alike, so the reader would be able to support his argument as he does not believe in climate change.
The last technique to be analysed in this text are statistics. Andrew Bolt uses statistics to show how useful Kevin Rudd's suggestions are towards climate change. As Kevin Rudd believes that if Australia cuts down their carbon dioxide use, it will make a significant difference. 'The truth is Australia on its own emits less than 1.5 per cent of the world's carbon dioxide.' [line 34]. The statistics here show that Kevin's opinion is useless. He also uses India's statistics as a support. "Yes, India's surface temperature over a century had inched up by 0.4 degrees, but there had been no change in trends for large-scale droughts and floods, or rain: "The observed monsoon rainfall at the all-India level does not show any significant trend . . ." [line 71-73]. This obviously states that there have been no significant changes apart from a rise of 0.4 degrees on the surface temperature. The editor uses statistics to question and help the reader rethink the effects on climate change and climate change itself. Without statistics, the reader would also delude into 'Rudd's mad plan' as the reader is not as convinced because no work or research has been made throughout writing this editorial.
The editorial is an important feature to convince readers. It allows readers to understand and think about climate change, global warming and how to avoid it. Editorials share it's purposes and its reasoning from the editor's point of view with the reader, it is utilized to explain to the reader how one feels and how it may also affect the reader him/herself. The editor uses a variety of techniques to convey his array of ideas effectively, through exaggeration, facts and emotions. Likewise, to support the purposes of writing this editorial and to help the editor's argument towards 'Rudd's mad plan'. It also shows that the reader may think alike with Andrew Bolt and believe that Andrew Bolt's facts are all true and definite through the use of statistics. This shows that Kevin Rudd's campaign, with no proof, could be false and untrue.