HNIC
Anbu Operative 🎭
- Joined
- Feb 24, 2012
- Messages
- 2,503
- Reaction score
- 96
help me with this assignment?
for class I have to present how the three sociological perspectives (functionalist, conflict, Interactionist) would critically assess this report from a MASS MEDIA perspective. However, I'm having a difficult time understanding how MEDIA is portrayed in this report. What is the media/reporter and Prime Minister saying in this report. PLEASE HELP ME
it's broken into three parts:
The report starts:
The Prime Minister has appealed to workers in the car industry to cut down on avoidable stoppages. He said the industry had a record a of strikes out of proportion to its size, and he singled out, for particular blame, British's Leyland's Austin-Morris division, which he said was responsible last year for a fifth of the industry's lost production through strikes. Mr. Wilson said that unless labour relations improved, government help for British Leyland would be put in doubt.
His speech:
"Parts of the British Leyland undertaking are profitable, others are not, but the public investment and participation cannot be justified on thr basis of continued avoidable loss-making. Our intervention cannot be based on a policy of turning a private liability into a public liability."
Back to report:
What is not a matter of argument for the future is this. With public capital and an appropriate degree of public ownership and control involved, the government could not justify to Parliament or to the taxpayer, the subsiding of large factories which could pay their way, but are failing to do so because of manifestly avoidable stoppage of production.
for class I have to present how the three sociological perspectives (functionalist, conflict, Interactionist) would critically assess this report from a MASS MEDIA perspective. However, I'm having a difficult time understanding how MEDIA is portrayed in this report. What is the media/reporter and Prime Minister saying in this report. PLEASE HELP ME
it's broken into three parts:
The report starts:
The Prime Minister has appealed to workers in the car industry to cut down on avoidable stoppages. He said the industry had a record a of strikes out of proportion to its size, and he singled out, for particular blame, British's Leyland's Austin-Morris division, which he said was responsible last year for a fifth of the industry's lost production through strikes. Mr. Wilson said that unless labour relations improved, government help for British Leyland would be put in doubt.
His speech:
"Parts of the British Leyland undertaking are profitable, others are not, but the public investment and participation cannot be justified on thr basis of continued avoidable loss-making. Our intervention cannot be based on a policy of turning a private liability into a public liability."
Back to report:
What is not a matter of argument for the future is this. With public capital and an appropriate degree of public ownership and control involved, the government could not justify to Parliament or to the taxpayer, the subsiding of large factories which could pay their way, but are failing to do so because of manifestly avoidable stoppage of production.
Last edited:
