Media Deconstruction

Authors and Audience:

Who produced this document, and for what purpose?

The Blaze, an "independent" news organization that was founded by Glen Beck. It is a solid example of a "news and opinion" source that has a political agenda.  In regards to the cover store concerning the common core, and as is the case with many politically motivated news sources, this piece is attempting to provide insight into the common core for readers, while providing a hypothesis about the common core's "leftist" agenda and how it is failing our education system.  

When was this produced, and what was it's historical context?

This particular edition was released in May 2014.  It is released in a time when the common core is still extremely new to the education system, with the majority of the program just now being introduced in the country. While this creates vulnerability for the common core itself, it also sets up the population for a certain level of discomfort and dislike for the new program, due to the fact that it is different than how education has been approached for the past several years.  With an indeterminate situation such as this, it allows individuals and organizations a tremendous amount of room for interpretation and opinion, as the facts of the program are not yet well established in our society.  
Who is the target audience?

The main target audience is likely to be parents of children that are currently in the school system and will be learning by the common core.  The real audience, judging from the new source being founded by Glen Beck, is likely to be conservative individuals looking to confirm their suspicions about the common core, despite them being on various unfounded levels. 


Messages and Meanings
What are the messages communicated?
It is a fairly straightforward message that the common core is a threat to the American way of life and the education of our nation's youth. Really, the entire cover seems to be battling education, with text at the top of the page proposing that colleges are "wasting your money."What techniques are used to attract and hold attention?

As I mentioned, changes in lifestyle make people feel very vulnerable and uncomfortable.  This cover seeks to gain attention by suggesting that the common core will entirely disrupt education, life, and freedom as we know it. It pictures a group of students in a classroom to represent the innocent youth that will be punished by this atrocity. The cover also suggests that it contains the truth. Who can argue with that?How might people interpret this message differently?

People often seek sources that confirm their beliefs while aiming to "truly" educate themselves on a subject. As this media source seems to have a conservative background (judging from online research), I would imagine that many who hate the common core would find themselves interested in this article, as it proves their suspicions.  Individuals that are proponents of the common core would likely relegate this article as conservative agenda seeking to undermine educational progress. 
Who might benefit from (and who might be harmed by) this message?

Honestly, I struggle to think of any true benefit from this type of article. I'm not saying that it isn't okay to be opposed to the common core; everyone is entitled to their opinion, and scholarly analysis and debate leads to progress.  The problem with this article is that it plays on negative emotions and fears. judging from an online summary of the article, it doesn't seem to analyze the pros and cons to the common core, how it could be improved, or how it is guaranteed to be a failure, but rather creates a politically charged situation that pushes raw emotion over logic. If students are caught in lingo in an educational transition due to political jockeying, then they are the ones that will lose in the situation. This would offer proof to the opponents of common core that the system does not work, but even in that situation, is anyone really winning?Representation and Reality

What information or perspective is left out of this message?

The prospective of the one that sees positive light in the common core seems to be left out of the message. Judging from this cover, common core has no chance to be of benefit to our society. 

Is this an accurate and credible representation?

There are differing views on the common core, both for and against; however, stating that the common core is an attack on our youth and a threat to freedom seems to be hyperbole and immediately, in my mind anyways, labels the article as an opinion piece and not of scholarly origin.  
How does this reflect the perspective or bias of its creator?

We live in a bipartisan hell, and The Blaze is no break from that situation.  Here is a quote from a summary of the article on theblaze.com, which I feel summarizes its bias:
Witness the progressive education scheme in action. America’s education system is being fundamentally transformed. Instead of fostering a generation of thinkers, today’s children are being indoctrinated with leftist philosophy while their privacy is being compromised by huge data-mining systems with private interests. If fully implemented, Common Core will serve as progressives’ greatest weapon against American freedom.
Source: 
http://www.theblaze.com/magazines/may-2014
 

Text and Subtext

Text: 

The cover is focused in a group of children in a classroom, seemingly working on an assignment while facing forward towards a chalkboard. Coming from the children are several "thought clouds" coalescing into the thought "Common core's threat to our kids, our freedom and our future."  The cover also has the tagline "Truth Lives Here." 

Subtext:

I will blatantly list my opinion impressions:

First off, if a news source has a tagline similar to "the truth lives here," I typically become immediately skeptical of how truthful it really is. This article immediately has me wary of its content simply due to the fact that it is using common core to suggest a political attack on our country and children.  I've read articles on the common core, both for and against, most of the scholarly, some making suggestions or pushing for different implementations, and compared to them, this piece looks like shit. I assume it is simply political noise thrown out into the shouting match that is our political environment with no heed for actual progress.  I imagine that if I were to read the article, I would be a worse person as a result. 

Aside from my own personal bias, subtext also includes:

Children are at risk due to the common core. The common core is taking away freedom.  The common core does not teach children. Children still use chalkboards in class. People talking about truth still use emotionally polarizing statements in headlines, which provides for a hilarious paradox.  

Language of Persuasion

1: Experts (they know the TRUTH DAMNIT!)

2. Fear (WON'T SOMEONE THINK OF THE CHILDREN)

3. Intensity (FREEEDOMMMMMMMM)

4. Plain Folks (innocent schoolchildren)

5. Charisma (well, he sounds like he knows what he is talking about...)

6. Extrapolation (how long has common core been around? and it is a threat to freedom?)

7. Glittering generalities (once again, FREEEEDDDOMMMMMM)

8. Name-calling (while not on the cover page itself, the summary shows that the word "liberal-blank" is likely used about 5 dozen times)

9. Nostalgia (remember when you were sitting at the desk writing definitions in class?)

10. Slippery Slope (Won't someone think of the freedom children?!!!!)

11. Ad hominem (commore core has turned into a phrase thrown around even if no knowledge is backing the arguement)

12. Diversion (the common core is bad, so your freedom is at risk?)

13. Timing (Common core has recently been introduced)