Electric Car

Controversial Prometheus;

Media Bias on the Debate about the Electric Car

Adrián Jaramillo

200123906

Critical Reading and Writing

BTE321

October 19, 2010

By the end of the nineteenth century automobiles had replaced animal powered transportation, changing the landscape with asphalt roads; the culture, terminating the age of the cowboy in the United States; and the economy, making the world dependable in fossil fuels and making oil one of the most volatile commodities. The oil based civilization has its drawbacks like pollution, political instability, and since the early sixties, high energy costs due to the OPEP’s intervention in the market. An alternative to the internal combustion transportation has been researched endlessly. One of the alternatives is the electric car. Although not a new idea, recent advances in battery technology have made the electric car a feasible option. The argument on whether the electric car is going and should replace the internal combustion system has advocates in both sides of the discussed. The media is one of the main arenas where the idea is being debated. In two recent news paper articles: “Electric cars aren’t all they are revved up to be” published on the Brooks Bulletin, and “Electric cars take off, quietly” published in the Vancouver Sun, people in favor and against the electric car argue about the viability, benefits and detriments of the electric car. These articles manipulate the environmental, economic and technical implications in order to support their point of view.

One of the main arguments in the electric car discussion is on the environmental consequences. The article on the Vancouver Sun gives us a rosy picture on its first paragraph: “Imagine a future in which cars zip silently along city streets, cause no pollution, never need an oil change and cost as little as 60 cents to fill up” (Sherlock 2010), The manipulative imagery used in this article invites the reader to give free rend to imagination...