In Trials of Oz, Robertson presents the opposing views between himself and Judge Argyle on the issues of censorship of obscenity and freedom of expression.
Judge Argyle is described by Robertson to employ a variety of tacit techniques to sway the jury to his cause. Employing slogans such as the rhetorical anecdote “would you want your neighbour’s children to see this…?” Utilizing inclusive pronouns, reinforce the view that ‘obscenity’ is morally unacceptable. The harsh plosives in ‘scathing and contemptuous’ and ‘infinite toxicity’ are an example of adjectival reference, which serves to persuade the audience in formulating an imagery of the ‘Oz’ magazine. Yet as readers we are positioned by Robertson to disenfranchise Argyle, and support Robertson’s assertion of miscarriage of justice. The excerpts of cherry- picked transcript are employed to shock and ridicule. Lines such as “Why is Rupert Bear equipped with a large organ?” serve to create humour and cast the irony of imbecility upon the prosecution. Deliberate showcase of slang on part of the prosecution such as ‘fucking in the streets’ ‘make Rupert Bear Fuck?” creates images of anarchy and immorality. Through vilifying the opposition and asserting himself as an ally of justice, Robertson positions readers to support the right against censorship.

The same conflict of interests surrounding an issue with two sides is evident in the panel program ‘The Big Questions’ by Nick Campbell, debating the question “Is The Bible Still Relevant Today?” In the Big Question, the affirmative showcase the Bible as relevant by appealing to humanistic values such as, faith, goodness, and Samaritan-ism.The metaphoric “myths contain truths that will always resonate with us as human beings, ” align the audience to perceive the Bible as a fundamental part of Human history. The biblical references and interjections of parables such as “we see our own human natures… we find a truth that endures.” Appeal to the viewer’s personal faith through anacoenosis. In contrast the opposition, reply with negative retorts using rhetorical techniques such as anadiplosis in “The great cop out, the great excuse to evade the need to think… is Faith. Faith is because of the lack of evidence.” Here, the British Atheist Richard Dawkins re-emphasizes his stance through an imperial tone of mockery to appeal through prestige and rational credibility to a contemporary audience. The use of strong vocational language by Dawkins through exaggerated hand in the air gestures is coupled with a tone of cynicism, when he says “Much of the Bible is not systematically evil but just plain weird.’ Dawkins bewildered postulation and sarcasm, rhetorically persuades the viewers to see his perspective through voice and action.

http://engrishforum.wordpress.com/category/module-c-representation-and-text/