The paper will attempt to compare and contrast, opinions written in the New York Times, How Medicare Fails the Elderly by Jane Gross and Is the Tea Party Over? by Bill Keller. The piece of opinion by Jane addresses the issues of access to proper health care to the elderly citizens of America and the price they pay for care in contrast to the government program that pays for unnecessary medical care but does not assist in the most necessary healthcare that the elderly need and thus the challenge of footing this bills is on the patient who will spend all her saving on medical care and members of the family. The opinion by Bill Keller is a political opinion on the politics in the Republican Party especially the Tea Party movement and the current debates on presidential aspirants in the party.
Jane Gross is writing from personal experience as her mother was affected by what she is writing about. Bill Keller is a political observer but from the piece he seems to be supporting Rick Perry to win the nomination of the Republican Party and the individual who has the possibility of winning the hearts of the Tea Party movement. The papers are therefore based on. One opinion based on personal experience and the other on a bias of supporting a certain individual.
The argument by Bill Keller argument would be more effective if his tone of voice was more neutral, so he could reach out to the less informed percent of audience. His argument also would be more effective if he was to not force his opinions onto the reader. Using words such as “government-loathing populists” and “AWOL” only reveals his one sided opinion of the matter, which only gains the audience that has the same opinion as he. If he cared about reaching to the whole audience that will read his opinion piece, he would provide more facts as well as opinion of experts. Although he included little to no examples of both, he provided some statistics of instances where Perry would appease the Tea Party which were favorable to a neutral reader. While providing little supports and a stern opinionated voice, Bill Keller’s article may be appealing to those readers who share the same opinion of the matter as Keller, but to the rest of his audience his argument is not reliable.
Jane Gross’s voice to readers comes across as being concerned rather than stern. She reveals to the reader the concerns she has for the American elderly as well as the younger generation in order to prepare them for the future corruption of Medicare. She gives examples of her own mother’s experience with Medicare and brings forth that Medicare only paid to take care of her to be comfortable for her death. In essence, she is informative to the reader by including supports by opinion of experts, examples, and some statistics.
By comparing the two authors arguments one can conclude that both see eye to eye when presenting a matter that concerns them to the reader. However, Bill Keller is stern and Jane Gross is concerned. A more effective argument would reach out to all readers instead of focusing on the ones who already share the same opinion; this is why Jane Gross’s argument was more effective.
The opinions by both writers lack objectivity, Jane gross focuses mainly on the ills of government run Medicare, she fail to address any benefits of this program to the elderly. The opinion focuses mainly on the weaknesses of Medicare, this is because as she wrote the opinion we can see the pain in her due to the experience with her mom. The paper is full of emotion that affects it from being objective. The opinion by Bill is also not objective at all as the opinion seems to be a campaign tool for Rick Perry and not the issue that address the topic holistically and objectively.