Analyzing an Opinionative Piece

388 Words1 Page

Analyzing an Opinionative Piece

Andrew bolt's opinionative piece, "Expat Pat a funny choice", (Herald

Sun), contends that Pat Rafter "clearly doesn't deserve" the

Australian of the year award because he lives in a "tax haven".

As indicated by Bolt, Rafter is not entitled to "this honour" because

he is a "tax exile" not living in Australia, which would save him "a

heap of money". Such emotive and colloquial language, encourage

readers to question Rafter's initial motive, and symbolize Bolt as an

ordinary Australian who is representing the majority of the public

opinion.

Seeing that Pat Rafter is a "resident of Bermuda", he is unable to

help pay for "our schools, hospitals, police and roads" through taxes.

This appeals to the reader's sense of fairness and justice. Readers

are inspired to feel let down and deceived by Rafter's actions. This

also questions whether Rafter deserves to be Australian of the year.

The creditibilty of the National Australia Day Council is also

challenged by Bolt. Rafter would not have got the "gong" if NADC had

"followed its own rules". Bolts stresses that it is a "joke" that

"three of the past five Australian of the Year" were sportsmen, and

the fact that NADC had "bend its rules". The besmirching of the NADC

serves to create a sense of negativity around the council, and

encourages the reader to believe the award is only given to sportsman.

This further questions whether the council is reliable.

The argument advances in the article when Bolt sarcastically asks:

"what are the 'exceptional circumstances' which force Rafter to live

in Bermuda?" The rhetorical question is, again, questioning the motive

of Rafter. Not only does Rafter live there, he has been declared a

"resident" of the "tax haven". Readers are convinced to feel that

Rafter's award is undeserved because he lacks support for his own

More about Analyzing an Opinionative Piece

Open Document