The Euro Crisis

Sharon Oldani
Saron Solomon

Here is a brief video describing the Euro crisis to give background on the topic before we delve into our discussion:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-13991135

We found three articles that dealt with the subject:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-14418290

This article provides a glimpse of how the downfall of Euro might potentially affect the general public. If a person wants to know how downfall of the Euro might might impact their investments, savings, retirement funds and holiday funds, there questions can be answered by taking the time to read this BBC article. In addition, the UK is affected by his crisis because they lend money to the troubled economies and they provided a loan to the International Monetary Fund, which funds this bailout. In essence, it is an article depicting how the downfall of the euro effects industrialized societies.

http://www.usatoday.com/money/world/story/2011-10-27/eurozone-crisis-deal/50963370/1

Europe is the America’s largest trading partner and according to Obama, if their economy remains weak, it is going to have an impact on our economy in terms of job prospects and businesses. This article illustrated five ways how the Euro crisis can affect the United States. First, the big banks of America are affiliated with their banks. However, our largest exposures are not affiliated with the most affected countries, but some banks such as JP Morgan and Bank of America have a significant amount of credit risks in the most endangered countries. (Portugal, Ireland, Italy, Greece and Spain) Second, this could be a potential threat to the U.S exports because 20% of our exports go to Europe and those who work for a company that exports good to Europe, will become vulnerable. Third, the companies that have investments in Europe will be at risk, fourth individual investors will be at risk and fifth, it might have a “dramatic effect” on the upcoming elections.

http://technorati.com/lifestyle/travel/article/sell-the-acropolis-end-the-euro/

Can the Euro crisis be a good thing? According to Technorati.com, it is. The article “Sell the Acropolis, End the Euro? Greece is a Travel Bargain” almost welcomes the Euro crisis, unlike many of the other articles that we have looked at. Before the Euro crisis became a problem, Greece “did not necessarily go out of their way to cater to tourists.” But, as we know, as Greece started borrowing more and more money that they could not pay back, their economy went down and the price of the Euro went up, creating quite a pickle for the country. Now they have to do something to nurse their bleeding economy. So, they boost tourism. According to Google Finance, one Euro is equivalent to 1.38 dollars, so they somehow have to add “travel value” to tourism to offset this appreciation of monetary value. So, the industry introduces complementary and free benefits for places like hotels to attract tourism. Prices are also being lowered for the same reason. In essence, the country is basically on it’s knees begging for tourists to come, making tourists very happy.

All of these articles talk about the Euro crisis, but they hardly say the same thing. Each of them come from different standpoints, leaving an impression on the reader that is different from article to article due to the way the material is presented. Depending on the audience they are writing to, the articles cater to the readers even though they might say the same basic points.
For example, the BBC and the USA Today article seem very similar in terms of an economic standpoint. Looking at the BBC article, it seems to talk from the reader’s standpoint, like when they ask “surely all these worried looking traders have nothing to do with me?” This almost forces the reader to relate to the article because they are reading it from “their” view. Now, the question comes up, who is “me” reading the article? Based upon the main points that they cover, anybody in an industrialized society could gain from this information. There is a huge range in backgrounds of the people that the article targets. This ties back into the reader’s relationship with the article. Since there is that range of people targeted as readers, they have to come up with a simple way to relate the reader to the article, so it is relevant. This article was written to draw in all sorts of people, creating less biased work. On the other hand, the USA Today article is written much differently, considering that the main audience are Americans. This article emphasizes how the Euro crisis might potentially affect Americans, whereas the BBC article illustrates how it might affect a more general audience. Hence, the USA Today article is more specific and the BBC article is more broad. In terms of subjectivity, the USA Today article is presenting the information in order to make the American audience aware of the issue, considering that it might potentially affect them hence making them feel or believe a certain way. In comparison to the BBC article, the issue is presented in order to inform the general audience and it can directly impact how they think or feel depending on whether the certain aspects relate to them.

Finally, there is the Technorati article about traveling to Greece during this Euro crisis. It takes a completely different stance than the other two articles because it’s trying to convince the reader that it is the prime time to visit Greece despite of the crisis, thus flaunting the benefits of traveling to Greece. Unlike the two other articles, this article skims the surface of the Euro crisis and attempts to provide a different perspective on how this crisis can be a positive outlook for the reader. In reiteration, this article illustrates how the Euro crisis can positively impact the reader in terms of receiving a travel bargain and the other two articles emphasize on how the Euro crisis can potentially affect the readers negatively. Obviously, the Technorati article is hugely biased because it completely leaves gaping holes in the description of the Euro crisis, leaving the reader almost excited that it is occurring. Because of this bias, the reader’s subjectivity is influenced by the impression of the Euro crisis, making them feel that the crisis is beneficial in terms of receiving travel bargains.

It’s evident that the Euro crisis is the root of the problem in all of these articles and the effect of this outcome is displayed. In the BBC article, the information provided is less controlled because they are catering to a more general audience. In the USA Today article, the news is more controlled because their main audience are Americans so they have to cater more to their needs, hence writing an article on how the Euro crisis will affect the US. The rhetoric behind the BBC and USA Today articles argues that there is an issue and conveys how it effects the target audience. Now, the Technorati article is also controlled, considering that they skimmed the surface of the crisis, diverting the attention of the readers to the benefits of traveling to Greece at this time. It persuades the reader to believe that the Euro crisis is beneficial for them, which is a form of rhetoric. It seemed that the more specific the articles got, the more biased they became, because important information was left out of the articles. This casts a different light on the issue to achieve a certain affect on the readers, making the reader’s subjectivity regarding the Euro crisis completely different. Depending on which article is looked at, the reader gets 3 very different impressions of the Euro crisis and Greece. Even though the articles have a similar topic, the presentation of the information creates different works with different biases.