Friday, March 23, 2018

How Does Discrediting Lead To Credibility?


Academic articles are one of the most popular stomping grounds for the Official Style—and this is no exception. “Mass Shootings in America: Moving Beyond Newtown” an article written by James Foxx and Monica DeLateur, works to debunk the myths following the Newtown Connecticut mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School, killing twenty-six students and teachers. The piece goes through the specific misconceptions created by the media’s coverage of America’s mass killings—everywhere from the body counts, murderers, and warning signs to school security, gun laws, and mental health services. They critically examine the media’s role in the intensification of fear encompassing these mass killings, questioning the spark in controversy and initiative for change by the country’s government and citizens. The authors take an opinionated stance, and essentially downplay the severity of the issue as a whole. They use this piece as a means to closing the gap between the perceived truth of mass shootings from the camera’s eyes and the ‘factual’ truth derived from a criminologist standpoint.
Cited by one hundred researchers of various disciplines; criminal psychology, forensic psychiatry, human communications, etc., the article is presented in a way that benefits those studying human behavior, governmental policy, and/or criminology. The audience is geared toward individuals studying this phenomenon or simply looking to gain general knowledge and/or an insightful perspective, whether that be students conducting research at a university, their professors, or simply people in this field of work. Overall, Foxx and DeLateur demonstrate an expertise and credibility within “Mass Shootings in America: Moving Beyond Newtown” by building legitimate knowledge for their readers through the drawing of previous research and their counter argument.
In this article, The Official Style works to include and exclude individuals in various ways. First off, its appearance in SAGE Journal, an independent international publication website , automatically prevents the general public from accessing it without a pricey subscription that most individuals aren’t factoring into their monthly expenses. Access of this goes to those with an institutional and/or research affiliation or those with the financial freedom to do so, naturally omitting a hefty percentage of the United State’s population. Another way this example of the O.S. omits readers is through the diction used throughout. This stems from the background of the authors— James Foxx being an American criminologist at Northeastern University and Monica DeLateur being a doctoral student in the School of Criminology in Chicago, IL. The diction throughout the piece—again, creates inclusion and exclusion by tailoring its jargon to those familiar with law and criminology terminology. Foxx and DeLateaur collaborated on this article to contribute homicidal studies research by disproving popularized claims, and adding a challenging/undesirable perspective on this current topic.
Sectioning the article in a way that allows one by one addressing of the specific myths surrounding mass killings, allows the authors the ability to add contrasting assertions to each one presented. This is done in a rather passive voice with the assistance of existing research claims. Being a sensitive and ethical topic for a majority of it’s readers, the text diverges away from personal convictions and uses evidence to reinforce its statements. In this instance, the text provides an abundance of numerical statistics and past recollections of individual mass shootings throughout America—“The news coverage of Sandy Hook had Americans glued to their TV sets. According to a USA Today/Gallup poll of more than 1,000 adults, half the respondents watched the news reporting “very closely,” while 90% indicated watching at least “somewhat closely” (Saad, 2012). Fox and DeLateur 131 The extensive news focus on school shootings certainly had an impact on perception and fear. The same USA Today/Gallup poll found that nearly one quarter of those surveyed believed that a shooting spree such as Sandy Hook was “very likely” to occur in their own community and more than half thought that it was at least “somewhat likely” (Saad, 2012). This is done commonly for the reason that discrediting another source, especially with a stance as strong as this, the research behind it has to be impeccable. Without it, other researchers could discredit their claims similarly to the way they did the media’s misconceptions. Offering others this sort of statement, Foxx and DeLateaur needed to compact as much knowledge and credibility into one academic article as they could to allow themselves the evidential support that would check out upon another’s further inquiry. Maintaining a sort of consistency in sentence structure, the Official Style was able to do this—using official punctuation and language to achieve a sense of credibility.
           As far as successfulness in it’s function, “Mass Shootings in America: Moving Beyond Newtown” does a satisfactory job at supporting it’s claims with backed research and relevant illustrations. This provides an adequate counter argument for the myths that developed in the midst of mass murders unfolding and increasing throughout the country. Within the discipline of homicidal studies, research is critical, as well as the focus on both psychological and governmental/policy aspects—which the article touches on. Criminology highlights both the criminal and institutional/structural makeup that influences him/her to carry out their atrocity; Foxx and DeLateur address both. The content richness of the text allows the article to function on a competent level.

Abby Walkush





No comments:

Post a Comment