Using a political artifact write a well-crafted analysis of the text. Focus on describing, interpreting and evaluating the text. In describing and interpreting, use Key Concepts of Political Communication and Techniques of Close Reading as a vocabulary to guide your analysis when appropriate. Your mini-criticism should be between 3-4 pages, not including works cited. It should have an introduction, conclusion and appropriate format and syntax for high-level academic writing. But how should you do it? Well, start by selecting an artifact for your discussion. Whether it is a simple or complex artifact is entirely up to you and what you feel comfortable developing. Then you should start your analysis. I would suggest keeping a glossary of both the key concepts from Lilleker and the close reading techniques suggested by Brummett nearby to guide you. You can also think about Pentadic analysis or other forms of criticism to which you can successfully document a connection and understanding. Use the terminology as a way of aiding your description of the artifact. From this description, then consider what meanings are being constructed above and beyond the manifest (most obvious) content of the message. When evaluating the artifact, you should help guide our understanding of its effectiveness with the audience, its aesthetic value or other assessment that you feel are guided by your description and interpretation. Overall, the evaluation actually becomes the motivating coherence behind your discussion. Your introduction should give me a roadmap of your development as well as a overall argument. Your conclusion should review your progress throughout the paper and re-iterate your dominant point.