![]() ![]() One will quickly notice that in this book, the winner does not writer his own history. ![]() It would obviously be fairly tempting to spend one's analysis of this book on the politically fascinating aspects of the book, but instead of falling into political discourse, what would it look like to analyze the book abstractly, without giving automatic preference to the scandalous, concrete details alleged by the book? Instead of looking into the book to find specific conspiracies or scandals, what might it look like to use the book to analyze more broadly the way human history works, and the way journalism has changed that process in recent history. Written by people who wish to remain anonymous We are thankful for their contributions and encourage you to make your own. ![]() These notes were contributed by members of the GradeSaver community. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |