Critical Essay of a Newspaper Article
In the article „We did it!” published on 2nd January 2010 in The Economist, the author presents women’s current situation on the labor market and the changes it has experienced over the past years. He states that female empowerment is “the biggest social change of our times”. However, he points out that there is still no equality between men and women. The latter still obtain lower wages for the same work, there still exists the problem of the glass ceiling and the question of having children still remains problematic for many employers. Even though some countries have introduced certain improvements to make the life of working mothers easier, these solutions are yet very imperfect and far too few. The author concludes that currently women keep advancing, as they have before.
For the title, the author chooses a phrase that may be confusing at first – “We did it!” – but its meaning becomes clear when we see the picture that illustrates the text. It’s the image of Rosie the Riveter, who during the Second World War was representing women who worked in factories.
Apart from the well-aimed title and illustration, the author selects data that supports well the thesis of the article and presents it in a clear, well-organized way. The conclusion, however, is slightly imprecise; the last sentence of the article is just a description of the current situation and does not seem to conclude the text in a logical way.
The style used is not very complicated, yet precise and accurate. The language is adequate to the profile of the newspaper the text appeared in, it is The Economist, which is addressed to the general reader.
On the whole, the text is aptly written and
For the title, the author chooses a phrase that may be confusing at first – “We did it!” – but its meaning becomes clear when we see the picture that illustrates the text. It’s the image of Rosie the Riveter, who during the Second World War was representing women who worked in factories.
Apart from the well-aimed title and illustration, the author selects data that supports well the thesis of the article and presents it in a clear, well-organized way. The conclusion, however, is slightly imprecise; the last sentence of the article is just a description of the current situation and does not seem to conclude the text in a logical way.
The style used is not very complicated, yet precise and accurate. The language is adequate to the profile of the newspaper the text appeared in, it is The Economist, which is addressed to the general reader.
On the whole, the text is aptly written and