Wall Street Free Essays

string(43) " promotes dishonesty in business dealings\." How far will you go to be successful? How far will you go to win? Nothing can illustrate the lengths that a person is willing to take just to profit than in the cutthroat world of stocks. And no place in the world is more ruthless than Wall Street. Wall Street (Stone, 1987) takes its viewers to a behind-the-scenes look at this place in the world where people live and feed on stocks. We will write a custom essay sample on Wall Street or any similar topic only for you Order Now The entirety of the film tackles a lot of moral conflicts that are involved in the business dealings done within the movie. This is Oliver Stone’s criticism of the mentality of the people who utilized illegal means just to get the biggest profit in the quickest time. Stone criticism not only targeted the corporate raiders whose practices were being exposed in the insider trading scandal in the 1980s, but it was a critique on the quick-buck culture that was prevalent then and even at this time. THE PLOT The plot is traditional and formulaic. A young hotshot, wanting to be successful, gets the opportunity when his persistence pays off as he is hired by a famous veteran. The rookie takes on the job albeit the discovery of the illegalities of the methods. He gets the perks and the movie shows its audience the grandiose rewards he gets. When a conflict of interest arises, he goes against the veteran. He loses everything yet he gets his payback. This has been a formula for a number of movies, and Wall Street is no exception. The young, idealistic hotshot here is Bud Fox, played by Charlie Sheen. He is a stockbroker for a lesser-known Wall Street firm. The hotshot is a dreamer. In one scene in the movie where he just lost a lot of money because of a client, he utters that he dreams of being on the other side of the call sometimes. In subsequent scenes too, it can be observed that Bud does not dream of being a stockbroker forever. To achieve that dream, he constantly calls the office of his hero for a chance of getting an audience and ultimately, impressing him to gain employment under his hero’s wing. The veteran, excessively rich and wealthy, and the movie protagonist’s hero is Gordon Gekko. This role led Michael Douglas to garnering an Academy Award of Lead Performance by an Actor. He is indeed truly worthy of the award as he portrayed the cold and vicious yet in some way appealing Gekko to the hilt. Gekko represents the ultimate corporate raider, the Wall Street shark who buys and closes down companies under their noses for his profit. Yet his methods, though disagreeable, are effective and masterfully justified as evidenced by his Greed is good speech in the movie (to be discussed later). On Gekko’s birthday, Bud shows up in Gekko’s office with a box of Davidoff cigars as a present and a bribe to finally get the opportunity he has been waiting for. Desperate to impress Gekko, Bud blurts out insider information that his father Carl (played by Martin Sheen, Charlie’s real-life father) revealed to him about BlueStar airlines. Carl works for BlueStar and also serves as a union leader there. When Gekko profits out of Bud’s tip, he saw something in the kid that he liked. He saw the killer instinct, the will and determination to do whatever it takes to succeed. He saw a bit of himself in Bud, as he revealed later on in the movie. He then employs Bud to work for him but not as an ordinary broker. He asks Bud to spy on his competition and other illegal acts. At first, Bud hesitates but he eventually agrees. He is rewarded with his works, and not without extravagance. Bud enjoys the luxurious life that his work with Gekko provided for him. The main conflict of the film arises when Bud decides to make BlueStar competitive. Bud enthusiastically pushes forward his proposals to Gekko. Gekko, on the other hand, agrees with the proposals armed with contrasting intentions compared to that of Bud’s. When Gekko and Bud present their plan to BlueStar representatives, including Carl, Carl voices out his opposition as he sees behind the guise that Gekko puts on. Yet, Bud remains to be sold by Gekko’s deception. It did not take much time before Bud realizes what Gekko’s plan really is. When Bud learns that Gekko plans to sell the hangars and planes, he confronts Gekko. When asked why he was wrecking BlueStar, Gekko answers, â€Å"Because it’s wreckable.† From there, Bud sets off a plan to save BlueStar. Eventually they do but not without consequences. Bud is arrested for illegal insider trading by the SEC. Still, he manages to get payback as he lures Gekko into a trap and thus managing to record Gekko’s confession of guilt on tape. The film ends with Bud walking on the steps of a courthouse on his way to his sentencing. ISSUES The Quick-Buck mentality vs. Hard Work and Fair Play Wall Street can be likened to a battle of two fathers over the moral consciousness of a son. This is not the only movie where Stone used this concept. His Vietnam War movie Platoon also shares this conflict (where Charlie Sheen also portrays the role of the â€Å"son† torn between two fathers, one good and another evil). In Wall Street, Carl Fox and Gordon Gekko represent the two opposing sides in the contest over the moral beliefs of Bud Fox, the â€Å"son†. Gekko represents the cutthroat businessman who resorts to all means to gain the biggest profit in the easiest way. He does so through illegal means but not without justification. The list of his reasons is not uncommon and yet is still popularly used even up to these times to justify wrongdoings. These include excuses like â€Å"Everybody does it†, â€Å"There’s something in this for everybody†, â€Å"Nobody gets hurt†, â€Å"As long as we don’t get caught†, etc. This promotes dishonesty in business dealings. You read "Wall Street" in category "Essay examples" But as shown by Gekko, it is this type of people who get to be on top of the hill. The ruthless, the cunning, or the relentless are the ones who succeed and eat up those who strive to compete in the merciless world of business. The implication of the justifications Gekko provides for his actions can be summed up in the common adage, saying that â€Å"if you can’t beat them, join them†. Surely, there are other people in the real world that are similar in nature to Gekko, people who become extremely successful using unethical methods. Competing with these people is one Herculean task to surmount. Thus, there are those who give up on competing with such sharks on ethical grounds and are consequently influenced to follow their lead. In today’s world, it is not surprising to find people like Gekko and the quick-buck mentality that they adhere to, where they prioritize profit over anything else including morals and services to their clients. On the other hand, Carl Fox represents the people who advocate hard work and honesty in business dealings. Carl Fox is not the only character in the film that adheres to such philosophy. One superior of Bud in the Wall Street firm stated, in one of the earlier scenes, that â€Å"good things sometimes take time.† He cites IBM and Hilton as examples. This is a direct contrast to Gekko’s impatient and short-term approach towards business. Success, via the ethical way, takes time. But eventually it will come to those who work hard and remain ethical in their ways. This kind of thinking seems to be overshadowed by the prevalent success of the Gekko-like businessmen. Despite that, there are those who remain stern to keeping their methods unstained by illegalities. They preach that hard work will reap its benefits but it takes time. Gekko scoffs at this conception citing his father as an example of a hardworking man who worked all his life and died of mediocrity. In the present day, there are those who steadfastly hold on to this principle despite all the satirical points made against their cause. Bud Fox in the movie represents the â€Å"son† torn between two fathers, namely Gekko and Carl. He is the student confused on which school of thought to pursue, the quick-buck or fair play. This is actually a mirror of today’s world. Stone intended this movie to reflect the rugged financial wheeling and dealing that is actually happening, especially at the time when the movie was made. The playing field is so dominated by players who have regard profit, wealth and winning above any other consideration. What Bud Fox represents is the individual player who is given a choice on which side to choose, the cunning majority or the blue-collar minority. Stone’s message is a dark warning for those who follow Gekko’s way. As one of Bud’s bosses says it, â€Å"Enjoy it while it lasts, because it never does.† The film ends with both Fox and Gekko getting prosecuted. They may enjoy the riches brought about by their illegal actions but time will come when their misdoings will collect their due. Meanwhile, those who do not heed the call of the â€Å"easy money† are bound to have no worries of retribution. Greed is good? The highlight of the film, what significantly won Michael Douglas his Oscar for Acting, is the scene where he delivers the Greed is Good speech. Such conception was the popular mindset (and alibi) for the profit-obsessed culture in the 1980s market that Stone was criticizing. By this scene, Stone shows his viewers the kind of eloquence and guts that people like Gekko have in defending the actions they do. This scene masterfully and powerfully provides that illustration. Gekko’s claims, amazingly delivered by Douglas, provide a chill to the spine of viewers as it shows just how ruthless and yet appealingly logical Gekko is. He delivers the speech with such composure and bravado that merits cheers and jubilation among his audience and silences his detractors despite the obvious disreputability of his catchphrase. The setting here is that Gekko is trying to take over a company, Teldar Paper. In a shareholders meeting of such company, company management oppose such planned take over by Gekko mainly because of Gekko’s reputation as a company raider. Gekko, on the other hand, rebuffs this voiced out opposition with this grand speech, provided here in part: The point is, ladies and gentlemen: Greed, for lack of a better word, is good. Greed is right; greed works. Greed clarifies, cuts through, and captures the essence of the evolutionary spirit. Greed, in all of its forms, greed for life, for money, for love, knowledge – has marked the upward surge of mankind and greed, you mark my words – will save not only Teldar Paper but that other malfunctioning corporation called the USA. At first look, he may have a point. As evidenced by the acceptance of his audience, it seems as though Gekko has indeed made a very convincing statement. All development can be traced to man’s insatiable hunger for life, money, love, knowledge, etc. as noted by Gekko. It is seemingly logical to think that greed is the driving force behind every single successful venture of man. If that is so, then it is just right to teach people to be greedy. Right? If this was the case, then the movie should have ended with a decisive statement that Gekko never gets caught. But Stone had a different view. Stone included this speech in the movie to showcase up to what absurd lengths people like Gekko go to in order to twist the facts and values long-cherished by society just to justify their cause and actions. Greed is wanting in excess of something that is never meant to be one’s own. It is an excessive desire to possess more than one needs or deserves. Anything in excess is wrong and can never be good, as declared in Nicomachean ethics. This just proves how twisted Gekko and his kind are. They turn something innately bad to something good just to satisfy their inner selves that there is nothing wrong with what they are doing. They are blinded by their greed on what is truly wrong and write. Greed overcomes them. The desire for winning the deal is more dominant than observing ethics. Even the rewards of money and luxurious living are never enough if one is overrun by greed. In the movie, Gekko and Bud are enjoying the luxurious life yet the audience never gets to examine the splendor of their riches as these are only shown in passing. Such is the life dedicated to greed. It doesn’t give room to gloat in the rewards because it constantly seeks more. The concept of enough eludes them. When Bud confronts Gekko of how much is enough, Gekko struggles to answer. Greed does that to a person. Greed corrupts. Too much of anything corrupts to a point where the boundaries between right and wrong are breached just to temporarily satisfy and insatiable appetite for winning the deal. Greed twists the morality of a person. It changes the priorities of a person involved, in a deal; greed is self-serving instead of serving what the deal embodies, which is the people that will benefit from it. It is this moral corruption that Stone exposes through this movie, the moral corruption brought about by wealth and greed. The legal corruption is only set as a backdrop amidst the crisis in morality that the protagonist of the film is going through. CONCLUSION Oliver Stone’s main message in this film is that the ways of the wicked will ultimately fail. He concludes the movie by Gekko getting caught on tape with a confession of his illegal acts after he falls for a trap set by Bud and the SEC. Bud is also indicted for the things he did while employed by Gekko. The last scene shows him walking towards his sentencing. This ending can be classified as a traditional one. It gives the viewers the old impression that â€Å"good† ultimately triumphs over â€Å"evil†. If the movie happened in reality though, there would have been a very different ending. There is one observable major flaw in the movie. One can only speculate on the reasons why such flaw can be bypassed by Stone (either corporate pressure to leave a good ending or it’s a pun to the romanticism of movies). If Gekko is such a cold, calculating and cunning man, it is highly doubtful whether he would let himself be trapped by such methods. It is more doubtful if he would allow himself to be seen with Bud after Bud was unceremoniously arrested. It is also unlikely that Gekko would not anticipate a wire on Bud when they met near the end of the movie. In summation, the ending is highly doubtful. The relevance of such obvious flaw is that it leaves its viewers (at least, those who recognized such flaw) with no hope of romanticist ideals that such a conflict can be resolved easily. In today’s world, there are a number of Gekko’s around. The flaw of the movie makes viewers realize that a number of Gekko’s out there do exist and are left unscathed and undetected (maybe even untouchable). It is then left to the viewer what to do with such fact of life. Surrounded by sharks and unethical financial players, the present financial manager is faced with a choice, the Gekko-way or the hard way. The movie ends with an easy resolution promoting an ideal situation where the â€Å"bad† guys fail. In the real world, that may not always be the case. It is up to the person whether to abide by ethics and laws in financial dealings or bend such laws and ethical rules because there are those who get away with it and they are the ones on top. The movie provides two ways towards success, the hard and long way or the easy way where rules are only part of the show. Reference: 1. Stone, O.   (1987). Wall Street. California: 20th Century Fox.    How to cite Wall Street, Essay examples

Humans Screwed Up Essay Example For Students

Humans Screwed Up Essay PEOPLE ARE THE MOST DISGUSTING CREATURES ON THE FACE OF THE EARTH. YET WE ARE CLASSIFIED AS ANIMALS. ANIMALS, IN THE SENSE THAT WE TEND TO THINK OF THEM IN, AS NON-HUMAN ANIMALS, ARE BEAUTIFUL WHERE WE COULD NEVER BE. HUMANS ARE THE ONLY ANIMALS THAT TRULY ALTER THEIR ENVIRONMENT AND MAKE THEMSELVES A COMPLETELY ARTIFICIAL LIVING SPACE. WE PAVE OVER OUR FIELDS AND PLOW DOWN OUT FORESTS. WE PILLAGE THE WORLD THAT WE MUST LIVE IN AND ESSENTIALLY TURN IT INTO A CEMENT AND TAR WASTELAND. PEOPLE KILL FOR NO REASON AND COMMIT MURDER, EVEN UNTO THEIR OWN KIND. ANIMALS ON THE OTHER HAND SIMPLY LIVE. THEY CONSUME ONLY WHAT THEY MUST TO SURVIVE AND THEY LEAVE THE REST ALONE. A LION THAT ISN’T HUNGRY, FOR EXAMPLE, WON’T KILL. ANIMALS MAY BUILD HOMES, BUT THEY ARE BIODEGRADABLE HOMES THAT DON’T CLUTTER AND DESTROY THE LANDSCAPE. ANIMALS LIVE IN PEACE AND HARMONY AND THEY NATURALLY BALANCE EACH OTHER OUT. THERE IS A CIRCLE OF LIFE THAT WOULD BE MUCH MORE CIRCULAR IF HUMANS WEREN’T THERE TO STRETCH IT AND MOLD IT TO SUIT OUR FANCY. THE HUMAN IS BLOODTHIRSTY, IT DESTROYS ITS SURROUNDINGS AND EVENTUALLY ITSELF, AND YET WE CLAIM TO BE THE INTELLIGENT LIFE FORMS OF THE PLANET. THE GIFT O F A LARGER BRAIN CAPACITY HAS TURNED OUT TO BE A PANDORA’S BOX, WE USE IT BECAUSE WE CAN’T HELP IT, AND IT CAUSES NO GOOD. MAYBE IT IS THAT THE CAPACITY TO THINK HASN’T BEEN USED ENOUGH. OR PERHAPS IT IS THAT PEOPLE CAN’T THINK ANYMORE WHEN THEY LIVE IN AN ENVIRONMENT THAT THINKS FOR THEM. IT SEEMS THAT THE GIFTS GIVEN TO US HAVE CAUSED US TO BE CORRUPT DESTROYERS OF ALL LIFE. HUMANS COULD TURN AROUND AND BE THE FORCE THAT SAVES LIFE IF WE COULD CARE JUST A LITTLE BIT MORE AND THINK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT WHAT WE CREATE AND WHAT EFFECT IT WILL HAVE. IF WE COULD CONSIDER THE LYNX THAT PATROLS THE WOODS AND RELIES ON THE SMALLER LIFE THEN MAYBE WE WOULD NOT BUILD A ROAD THERE WHERE POLLUTANTS AND TRAFFIC CAN KILL ALL OF THE WILDLIFE. PERHAPS FOR EVERY THING THAT WE TAKE FROM NATURE WE CAN GIVE SOMETHING BACK. FOR EVERY ACRE OF LAND WE PAVE OVER WE SHOULD REPLANT A FOREST ON ANOTHER ACRE OF LAND THAT WE PREVIOUSLY TOOK. IT IS FAIRLY IMPROBABLE THAT ANY OF THAT WILL HAPPEN IN THE FUTURE THOUGH, NEAR OR FAR. HUMANS ARE STUBBORN AND STUCK IN THEIR WAYS. ANIMALS EVOLVE WHERE WE DON’T. IF THEY HAVE TO CHANGE IN ORDER TO SURVIVE THEN THEY DO OR ELSE THEY DIE. DARWIN’S NATURAL SELECTION REMOVES THE SPECIES THAT AREN’T FIT FOR THIS WORLD AND MAYBE THAT MEANS HUMANS WILL BE REMOVED SOON. ONE CAN ONLY HOPE SO, FOR THE SAKE OF THE REST OF THE PLANET. WOULDN’T IT BE FUNNY TO SEE THE ANIMALS TAKE OVER ALL THE PLACES THAT HUMANS ONCE CALLED HOME? WE COULD LOOK DOWN FROM ABOVE AND SEE PIGS SLEEPING IN OUR BEDS, AND IT WOULD SET US IN OUR PLACE- NOT HERE, AS WE EXIST NOW.

If Martians Paid A Little Visit Essays - Mars In Fiction

If Martians Paid A Little Visit IF MARTIANS PAID A LITTLE VISIT People believe that Martians have come to planet earth. And indeed many people have video taped many sights of little objects flying in the air, ones with different types of ordered movements, and others with no movements at all. But what would happen if one day these little unknown creatures decide they are going to actually park their little flying mobiles and show their faces? What would they say to us? What would they want from us? Why are they here in the first place? Many circumstances would occur not only for the Martians, but also for many people here on earth. Many families would probably want to move from their home to another country where the Martians would not appear. Others would probably want war, because they probably think that they are trying to take over the world. And others would probably weaken in their curiosity and would want to find out what they want and maybe come to an agreement so that they dont do anything to us. seeing how they have a much more advanced technology than we do, they probably would have something way more accurate than the do when it comes to weapons or simply just their mind and the way they think. If they do ever come to earth, there is no doubt that they are beings way more intelligent than we humans are. I believe that we have a good group of army men who would be willing to fight not only for our country, but for our planet as well if something comes to happen. But in my own opinion, there have been already so many clips of objects flying in the air, that I would dare to think that they are ready to come visit us any time soon, and when they do, I dont believe that they would come as enemies, but as Martians who are willing to get to know us as we are, and our many different countries and cultures. And them as well would be willing to show us how they live, and the different types of Martians that there are, just as here on earth there are many different races. Social Issues

Sometimes sadness

Sometimes sadness is feeling blue where someone just needs a caring friend or family member who can offer encouragement. Sometimes sadness is much more. Severe sadness can cause frequent crying spells, sleeping too much, or eating too much or too little. Women may resort to drugs or alcohol to make the pain lesson. What starts this kind or severe sadness? It can begin with a painful experience such as divorce, the death of a loved one, a lost relationship, or a troubled marriage. It can also begin with an event from childhood, such as, physical, emotional, or sexual abuse. Some women have Chemical Imbalances which cause them to be severely sad, and complicates them being able to solve everyday problems. Severe sadness is a type of illness called depression, and can be treated. Twenty-five percent of women are expected to experience depression at some point in their lives. Depression effects many women in today's society, and many of them do not understand what i! t is. Women also do not know how to identify the signs, or symptoms of depression. No one is immune from depression, and it affects everyone, from personal experience to depression in a family member. Depression is defined as the act of being sad, the state of being depressed, or low in spirits. Depression interferes with normal functioning, and can cause problems with work, family, and friends. Serious depression can destroy a family life as well as their own life. Melissa's life was going very well for her. She was recently married, and starting her new life. Melissa's life starting falling apart as she got news about her mother. Her mother had cancer, and wasn't going to make it. Soon her mother passed away, and she was left feeling abandoned, and alone. She felt as if a part of her was gone, and that she wouldn't be able to go on. Melissa and her mother were very close. They shared everything together, and were viewed as best friends. ...

Organisational Behaviour of Nestle Company Essay

Organisational Behaviour of Nestle Company - Essay Example The management of day-to-day activities is handled by executive board members. This report aims at giving a detailed analysis and discussion of how the organization is managed and specifically, to how it manages teams and how it makes decisions. This is to evaluate whether the company management practices are in line with management theory as pertains to teamwork and decision making. As such, the report will discuss theory on effective teams and decision making in organizations, examine how the company actually conducts those practices, establish the gap between theory and practice and finally, make recommendations on best practice. I have not worked for the company before but I have researched and obtained enough information to guide the analysis from the company website and other sources such as former employees. BUILDING AND MANAGING EFFECTIVE TEAMS IN THE WORKPLACE EXPECTED Rosenhauer (2005 p. 36) defines a team as â€Å"people who work together in close proximity with each othe r and who interact with other teams in the workplace.† A team is formed to carry out a specific goal. A team can be functional or cross-functional depending on the organization structure and also on the management principles. A functional team comprises of members of same department or who carry out similar functions while cross-functional teams are formed by employees from different functions. Whatever the type of the team, its effectiveness is very crucial in ensuring organizational success. An effective team has various defining characteristics. First, it must have clear purpose or expectations (Heathfield, 2012). While building the team, management should explain to the team what is... This essay aims at giving a detailed analysis and discussion of how the organization is managed and specifically, to how it manages teams and how it makes decisions. This is to evaluate whether the company management practices are in line with management theory as pertains to teamwork and decision making. As such, the essay also aims to discuss theory on effective teams and decision making in organizations, examine how the company actually conducts those practices, establish the gap between theory and practice and finally, make recommendations on best practice. The researcher have not worked for the company before, but he has researched and obtained enough information to guide the analysis from the company website and other sources such as former employees. At Nestle Company, most of the tasks are performed by various departments such as research and development, management, human resources and production. As such, each department works as a team in order to achieve the overall objec tive of the organization. Effective teamwork and sound decision making are key to organization success. Nestle has been successful in various areas but still more needs to be done if it needs to be recognized as a world leader in Nutrition, Health and Wellness and be trusted by all its stakeholders. Nestle has a culture of shared values which guides all its actions but sometimes it may hinder success. Nestle needs to engage employees by involving them in decision making and also train the management on team management and decision making skills.

Human Sexuality Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

Human Sexuality - Essay Example Whether it would be positive or negative, the power of research and its importance, are undeniable and relevant. For any researcher(s), it becomes the question first and foremost, as to what any long term impact the individual(s) work, would have had on the ability for greater understanding. Articles and research papers are often times written by those who seek to research issues and then wish to deliver what they find to the rest of the world. Others may also wish to produce articles themselves, only this time, on assessing the impact of the work of others, such as the case would be with John Bancroft. In his work 'Alfred C. Kinsey and the Politics of Sex Research', Bancroft looks to the work done by Kinsey and the response of others to the research itself. With that being said, in regards to Kinsey, "It was evident from his own research, and has been confirmed in various ways since, that major changes in sexual behavior had been underway through much of the first half of the 20th century," (Bancroft, p.2). This statement in itself, would give credence to the validity of Kinsey's work and show the need for greater study and debate. The article discusses the attention paid towards contraception and how the debate would consider, for instance, the use of contraception and its ability to control the size of average families. From a social standpoint, there would be those that felt it was important to have the opportunity to be aware of such issues and others would think that an issue like sexuality, should be kept in the confides of the home and in the bedroom between a man and woman. While it would have been easy to single out Kinsey for his research, it is important to note that, "He was not the first to report results of sex surveys in the US," (Bancroft, p.3). With that in mind, it would be fair to classify Kinsey as one of many, who would have put together studies on the matter at hand. Author Bancroft asserts, regards to assessing Kinsey's impact, "But one clear part of Kinsey's legacy is that sex became less mysterious," (Bancroft, p.4). When certain things have not been discussed in any great detail before, they can often times seem to some, as being unknown and dangerous even. Kinsey's work would take away the disguise and uncertainty about regular human sexual activity and reveal it to be nothing more, than typical behavior that would occur among healthy human beings. His greatest desire would be to reveal the distinct natures of male and female human beings and how each one would approach sexual intercourse. Sometimes, after research has been performed, the results lead to the production of revised guidelines. This would be true as a result of Kinsey's work. Based on his findings, "The American Law Institute, after much debate, published its revised Model Penal Code in 1995. This was clearly influenced by Kinsey's findings," (Bancroft, p.4). The author further goes on to detail that, as a result of Kinsey's work, the revised Model Penal Code would make it so that such things as being a homosexual, living together when you were not married, as well as the sexual activity of two people who were willing participants, were no longer seen as crimes. With such a revision taking place, it would lead many to consider the influence of Kinsey in the area of sexual activity, to be considerable and not to be

CDA analysis Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

CDA analysis - Essay Example Thus, the selected element is a discourse, and its analysis has three dimension: as a text, sentence-by-sentence, and the words and phrases evaluation. Firstly, the text as a whole is close to the genre of political speech, since its content is mostly based on the speech made by Michelle Obama. In this context, it has her direct quotations both in the text and in the video. However, the content and the comments on the speech make this discourse resemble the slice of life genre with casual style of writing, which means that the Guardian presented the speech itself with its subjective reflection on it. On the frames, the exact concepts that unite text are two main identities – on the one hand, it discusses â€Å"ethnicity,† â€Å"black race,† and â€Å"African Americans† (it refers to both the speaker and to Tuskegee University students); on another hand, the family values appear in the text as â€Å"my husband’s chances,† â€Å"my girls,† and â€Å"kids and families.† Moreover, these two identities are in different position in terms of foregrounding and backgrounding, because i n the end of the text there appears the conclusion that â€Å"folks like you and me† (meaning the race) must believe in their potential (meaning realization in family life). On the cases of omission within the text, it does not mention any justification of first lady’s words with the facts from her biography; in other words, readers have nothing but to fall under emotional impression in what is given in the text. In addition, the voice of white public is neglected by this discourse, as the African American first lady speaks to the â€Å"mainly black graduates.† Although, the text includes horizontal intertextuality, as it has two direct quotations from other famous people on the same topic. Even though they have opposite opinions, the article does not reveal any support to them and provides only brief information on their