Comparison between two food insecurity articles

·         The Bias

o   The “Hindu” is against the government

o   The “Guardian” is for the government

o   Both papers are liberal views

o   The author of the “Hindu” is a professor in food insecurity and global environmental change

o   The author of the “Guardian” is a campaign manager of an NGO called 'Oxfam'

·         What is written – deeper meaning

o   “The most persuasive argument to the court is that the right to food is directly related to the constitutional guarantee of the right to life”

In this quote found in the 'Guardian' article is presenting a deeper meaning explaining that the right to food is a right to life, which human has a right to.

o   “Rather than using the abundance of grain as an opportunity to raise consumption among the people, the government has declared its intention to sell its stocks in foreign markets at subsidized prices"

 This quote found in the 'Hindu' presents to the readers that problem is that even though India has the opportunity to distribute food equally among the people, they chose to do the opposite and sell the stock to international markets for the same price.

·         Purpose

o   Informative or Persuasive

 “This stock is enough to provide 70kg a person, that is, about one-half an individual’s annual cereal requirement, to more than 600 million people.” The "Hindu" article is an informative, giving statistical and factual information.

·         Contention

o   “Rather than using the abundance of grain as an opportunity to raise consumption among the people, the government has declared its intention to sell its stocks in foreign markets at subsidized prices. Foreign buyers of Indian rice and wheat will only have to pay the rates charged to "below-poverty-line" (BPL) consumers in India.” This quote sums up the contention of the 'Hindu' article.

o   “If food security is about having certainty about the future, the common goal must also be growth in agriculture and food security that gives the same rights on the land to men and women farmers.” This quote sums up the contention of the 'Guardian' article

·         Differences

o   One blaming (Hindu), other trying to find solutions to the problem (Guardian)

o   The 'Guardian' was opinionated and the 'Hindu' was factual and statistical

Food Scarcity

Global Perspectives: Food scarcity

What are your personal perspectives?

·         Who is affected?

The people that are affected by food scarcity are those who struggle to find enough food of the right nutritional value to sustain a healthy living style. These people work hard every day just to make sure that they know that they will get a meal at least once a day.

·         How many are affected?

There are millions around the world due to poverty and global economy that are affected by food scarcity every day.

·         Is this a major problem?

This is a major problem around the world, because people are dying from starvation or lack of food with the proper intake of the right nutrition.

·         What are some solutions?

For a solution to have any ground breaking impact on this global problem, would have to be a global response on the situation. These solutions would need to be education for both farmers and public, to efficiently in crop growing and nutrition, fair distribution of food within countries.

What is the local/national (India) perspective?

What I think the local/national perspective on the problem of food scarcity is that it is often thought of as someone else’s problem and no one wants to put the major effort on the problem.

What is the global perspective?

The global perspective is that the country with enough to sustain themselves, need to and more, to be able to support the countries that are unable to support themselves.

 Causes of food scarcity: Migrations, conflict, disaster and famine.

What is the purpose of the video?	What are the claims being made?	Do you agree/disagree with contention of the video? Why?	Is this video factual or telling a story? What about?
To show what people with more can do to the less fortunate and to that we are all human.	The poor, hungry and ignored deserve to be treated like humans with basic human rights.	I agree with his argument, as every human should have access to basic human necessities.	This video is telling a story about a humble man treating and caring for those less fortunate around him.