President Obama's Inaugural speech
https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/inaugural-address-5
President Barack Obama was the 44th president of the United States of America, running as the democratic candidate, and was president for 2 consecutive terms, from 2009 to 2017. President Obama gave his first Inaugural speech on January 20th, 2009 at the West Front of the United States Capitol around 12 p.m after taking his oath of office, which supreme court chief justice, John G. Roberts had administered. The office of the press secretary then released the transcript the following day, on January 21st 2009. The purpose of the speech was to firstly communicate and reassure Americans. President Obama began by thanking ancestors and those who were previously in office. Then after acknowledging the work they had done, he recognizes that America is in a crisis including being in a midst of an economic recession, healthcare and education inequality, war etc. which may have been discouraging the unification and hope of the people. However, he steps up to reignite the public morale and trust, asserting through this speech he has many plans for renewal through a feeling of responsibility, urgency, and commitment to progress. By addressing many of the issues plaguing the country and discussing solutions in his inaugural speech, he attempts to prime the people to renew their faith in the government as well. He does this by using an inspirational and emotional tone which displays courage of convictions despite the circumstances that he’s taking oath in to encourage a renewed sense of unity. He also discusses his creative solutions, grounded in what had historically been effective, while also bringing a sense of community that challenges people to make sacrifices and take responsibilities until they overcome the crisis for the common good.
Objective purpose
The main argument of president Obama’s inaugural speech was that he is the right person to restore the hope of Americans in the midst of the crisis thus using an appeal to emotion and the ubiquitous sense of fear and uncertainty to discuss a sense of urgency in creating a resolve and innovative solutions that address each of the issues plaguing the country. This attempt to unify and encourage people was very effectively done because of how well he addresses the economic crisis, ongoing wars in iraq and afghanistan, climate change, healthcare, education, responsibility, accountability, cooperation, and ideals/ values to reassert that his renewal plan would represent and support the interests of all Americans. He also suggests solutions like creating new jobs and businesses to reestablish economic stability, ending conflict overseas and improving national security, funding innovative clean energy sources to help climate change/ environmental issues, holding leaders accountable to corruption, reforming healthcare and education systems to improve affordability and accessibility, as well as referring to principles of America’s foundation to refocus values as they move forward into the future through his leadership. He appears confident, trustworthy, and honest as he conveys his hope restoring plans to Americans, and primes them for his presidency.
News sources and political agendas
https://www.foxnews.com/transcript/what-obamas-inaugural-address-reveals-about-his-second-term
https://www.cnn.com/2013/01/21/politics/obama-inauguration-speech/index.html
When analyzing different news sources of this event there is an extremely noticeable difference in the framing. Perhaps it’s taking into consideration its liberal vs conservative audience, but either way it has a political agenda. The first article I analyzed was, What Obama's inaugural address reveals about his second term, published on Fox News on January 13, 2013. The second article was, Obama’s speech ties current issues to founding principles, published on CNN on January 13, 2013. While both articles discuss his second term, even the framing of the titles depicts the attitude towards this democratic candidate. The first article states that his inaugural speech was “ the most partisan and divisive in living history.” It also breaks down his character stating that he is incapable of honest disagreement because of his ideological rigidity, hypocritical about name calling, manipulative with how he discusses the conservative party, dismissive about the economic state of the country, committed to liberal ideology only, rhetorical and unrealistic, and unoriginal (because he takes a lot of inspo from lincoln etc.). The other article however the CNN article states that he uses “ poetic language for rhetorical power,” highlighting past accomplishments and discussing how he’ll address the most critical issues of the future. It also quotes many pieces and states that “ analysts called the speech politically astute and an important expression of new forcefulness by the president as he enters his second term following re-election last November.” Other quotes discuss his inclusivity, sense of urgency, efforts for the common good, advocacy for programs and the marginalized, This article suggests that he was “ fresh” in his efforts, but now has more experience while keeping the common interest at heart. There seems to be a big divide on social media as well, with facebook posts about the speech like “ The truth, and what we all need to hear,” “ I think that any President that came after Bush was going to have a hard time pulling America together. I think that in a lot of ways, Obama has done a great job”, “ typical liberal teacher teaching the youth the mental disorder all liberals suffer,” “ Obama has failed on every single thing he set out to do. Name me one 'accomplishment' and I'd be happy to tell you why you're hopelessly incorrect,” and “ Your one retarded pos if you think bamy did anything good for America and even more retarded to think of crooked hillary could fix anything.” There is a lot of discourse on the honesty and fulfillment of many of Obama’s promises made in the speech, and extremities of frustration, animosity, and resentment on both sides. However its evident that news sources also promote completely different perceptions of Obama and his work with a greater conservative audience in Fox, and liberal in CNN.
The consequences the present approach and future
If someone solely refers to these sources they will receive a biased analysis/ understanding as opposed to the actual speech or event. As seen by the hostility and disrespect in the comments, I honestly believe that social media hurts democracy. It may make people believe that most people hold ideologies at an extreme because the audiences that engage are typically more passionate, and according to many studies, most people are more moderate. While it is good that it encourages discourse and free speech/ expression it usually has presented more negative interactions that amplify the nation’s divisions. Politicians definitely come off differently on these news outlets and social media platforms because of political agendas to break down or demean individuals or praise them, developing very different perceptions of politicians depending on the source, as opposed to more objective sources, articles or even the actual speech. In terms of political communication and journalism it just means that biases are very prevalent, which is dangerous to audiences but unfortunately extremities, and fear typically generate the most engagement. To avoid this, audiences should refer to multiple sources with various audiences and tune in to watch these events and analyze them personally and have a personal opinion. Ideally though for journalism I hope there can be more objectivity in these sources, or at least encourage people to develop their own ideas.
Create Your Own Website With Webador