# data[].attributes.headline
I just wanna clear my mind now It's been racin' since the summertime                             And I'm holdin' down the summer now                                     And all I want is what I can't buy now                                  Cause I ain't got the money on me right now

# data[].attributes.subject
I just wanna clear my mind now It's been racin' since the summertime                             And I'm holdin' down the summer now                                     And all I want is what I can't buy now                                  Cause I ain't got the money on me right now

# data[].attributes.body
Fiona Sharkie wrote an opinion piece for the Herald Sun on May 19th 2013 called ‘Outdoor diners want smoke off their menu’ to express her opinion about people smoking in outdoor diners. Throughout this article, Sharkie uses a serious and informative tone to highlight that smoking is bad and Victoria should catch up with the other state by banning it. To support her contention, she argues that smoking in outdoor diners affects our health and that we, as one of the greatest states in Australia should do better. With the use of several persuasive techniques the author argues that second hand smoke is causing harm to Victorians lives.

Smoke free areas decrease the exposure to harmful and dangerous substances that can affect our health. They decrease the chances of getting fatal health conditions; this includes cardiovascular disease, heart diseases and lung cancer. With the use of appeal to fear and statistics, Sharkie positions the reader in support of banning smoking in public outdoor dining areas.  She also states that almost 4000 Victorians die of smoking-caused illness every year. Not only this, smoke free areas also help to reduce future smoking related illness by prompting smokers to quit because of the new laws. To support her strongest argument, Sharkie combines appeal to fear and statistics to create a sense of guilt in the citizens.

Every state in Australia has banned smoking in public outdoor areas except Victoria. Every citizen in Victoria is greatly affected by this issue and yet only few people sent their own submission to the Government. To support this argument, Sharkie uses the combination of inclusive language and expert opinion to target every sing Victorian. Sharkie uses the words ‘we’, ‘our’, and Victorians to make us feel more included in this issue. In her second paragraph, she is very straightforward and lists all of the Victorian foundations that encourages citizens of Victoria to send submissions to the state government consulting this issue. Expert opinion provides a sense of truth while inclusive language make her readers feel guilty about this issue.

In conclusion, the article by Fiona Sharkie was effective in persuading us to support the ban of smoking in public outdoor dining areas. Her use of techniques; appeal to fear and statistics whilst also using emotive and inclusive language in the article, positions the reader to her contention. Her tone is both informative and serious - with this, and the use of facts and statistics makes us feel that she is truly just concerned for Victorian’s wellbeing and that she is being truthful.

# data[].attributes.headline
Outdoor diners want smoke off their menu 

# data[].attributes.subject
Outdoor diners want smoke off their menu 

# data[].attributes.body
- Fiona and Jason

Fiona Sharkie, an executive director of Quit Victoria,

writes an opinion piece for the Herald Sun on the 19th of May 2013. Sharkie speaks about how outdoor public areas should ban smoking. She believes that this is a much bigger issue than is appeared to be. Fiona Sharkie believes that this issue needs to change, immediately. She argues that by not having a smoke free environment our likeliness, as Victorians to die of smoke related illness every year is high. She also argues that by having smoke free areas doesn’t only benefit the us as the second-hand smokers, but also the first-hand smokers who will reduce their consumption and help quit smoking as a whole. She immediately starts off her article with a calm, friendly and passionate tone as she talks about Melbourne’s pride in our café culture then gradually becomes diplomatic.

Fiona Sharkie explains that Victoria is the worst-known state in Australia for its tobacco usage.  She provides the reader with statistical evidence as to why smoking in public areas should be banned. “Almost 4000 Victorians die of smoking-caused illness every year, so environments which help them to quit rather than take up smoking and set positive role modelling for children will translate to significant health benefits across the state.” This persuasive technique shows us the effects of smoking which inevitably leads to cancer and death. This technique then leads on to her use of the rhetorical question. “The question has been asked: What is the State Government waiting for?” The question makes us think about why the Victorian state is not at standard with all the other states, this keeps us thinking about the situation and enhances our thoughts about the issue. This persuasive technique persuades us to position the reader to agree with her point of view.

The Victorian Government was awarded the Australian Medical Association’s Dirty Ashtray award for the worst-performing government in tobacco control. The author uses inclusive language and emotive language throughout the opinion piece to speak directly to us and refers to the readers and herself in the issue. She uses this technique in many of the paragraphs, such as “as long as smoking is allowed at the places where we eat out, we’re exposed to the dangers of second-hand smoke”. This persuasive technique is effective because she includes all of us in this issue because it is not only one persons’ issue but our whole states’.

Overall, Fiona Sharkie was effective in persuading the reader to her point of view. She was effective because of the persuasive techniques that she used, which include the uses of statistical evidence, rhetorical questions, facts, inclusive language and emotive language. The author used these persuasive techniques in her opinion piece which helped her bring in more of the readers to her point of view.

# data[].attributes.body
Sharkie justifies in the fifth paragraph that the “exposure to second hand smoke increases the likelihood of chronic health diseases such as cardiovascualar and heart disease and lung cancer”. Through Sharkies use of emotive language to evoke strong emotional response in order to coerce agreement from the reader, an example of this is when she states all the risk factors that come with smoking. She uses words like fatal and chronic to manipulate the readers response to feel sad for those people affected.

In conclusion, through Fiona Sharkie’s use of all these different persuasive techniques she has been effective in conveying her message across and persuading the reader her point of view.

anastasia, danielle, israa, antonio.

# data[].attributes.headline
Outdoor Diners Want Smoking Off Their Menu- By- At standard Group 

# data[].attributes.subject
Outdoor Diners Want Smoking Off Their Menu- By- At standard Group 

# data[].attributes.body
By At standard Group

This opinion piece called ‘Outdoor diners want to smoke off their menu’ was published in the Herald Sun newspaper on May 19, 2013 by executive director of Quit Victoria, Fiona Sharkie. She uses a serious and informative tone taking it straight to the point discussing the problems of smoking in outdoor restaurants and cafeterias, and showing ways on how to fix this issue by using persuasive techniques such as inclusive language and statistics which positions the reader by involving them personally with the issue as it is a disappointing sight to see the state of Victoria behind the rest of Australia.

Sharkie explains how second-hand smoking can cause devastating effects on human health and body. She persuades the audience by using statistical evidence and appealing to the distress of health and safety. Sharkie states, using statistical evidence that “Almost 4000 Australians die of smoking-caused illness every year” it is used to add more validity and sense of truth the argument presented.This causes the reader to think about their actions in a more deeper level and consider how much it affects their body in a negative way. To support this argument, Sharkie uses the technique appeal to health and safety by stating “second-hand smoke... increases the risk of chronic and fatal health conditions that include cardiovascular and heart disease and lung cancer”. Sharkie’s intentions were to educate Victorians how much smoking can affect your body and others around you. Sharkie then explains how smoking should be ban in Victoria in dining areas, by referring to the government and laws.

Sharkie uses the argument ‘Victorians appealing to the government requesting to ban smoking in outdoor dining areas’, to establish her credentials. This argument is supported through the use of various persuasive techniques in order to position the reader to share her opinion. With the use of inclusive language and appeal to fear, the author states, “In only four weeks [after the launch of the campaign], almost 7000 Victorians sent their own submissions to the Government to include smoke free outdoor dining areas”. In this context, appeals to fear is used to convince the readers that this is a serious issue and shouldn’t be taken lightly; as well as informing that ‘we’ as a whole should encourage the government to pass the legislation. It is displayed that Sharkie intended to capture the attention of diners with her concerned and reasonable tone. Delivered in a forthright manner, the author creates a positive and caring impression. Fiona Sharkie expresses to the audience that we as Victorians should take a stand against smoking in outdoor dining areas.

Within the article “outdoor diners want smoke off their menu”, the author Fiona Sharkie uses inclusive language, appeal to fear and health & safety as well as expert opinion in order to position the reader to agree with her contention. All of these techniques are interconnected (match each other) in some way and consequently persuade the target audience. In nutshell, Sharkie was effective in convincing the audience that this is a serious issue and further actions should be taken to ban smoking in outdoor dining areas.

# data[].attributes.headline
Outdoor Diners Want Smoking Off Their Menu

# data[].attributes.subject
Outdoor Diners Want Smoking Off Their Menu

# data[].attributes.body
By - JHOM

Fiona Sharkie; executive director of Quit Victoria, wrote an opinion piece for the Herald Sun, regarding laws of smoking in public areas, appropriately titled ‘Outdoor Diners Want Smoke Off Their Menu’. Sharkie addresses the audience in an i nformative, straight to the point type of tone showing her

belief that smoking in all public areas needs to be banned. She effectively uses expert opinion, satire and metaphors tastefully throughout her piece to persuade the reader of her contention.

Sharkie’s tone throughout ‘Outdoor Diners’ changes appropriately, according to the persuasive techniques she uses in each paragraph. This is particularly evident in her fourth paragraph. She effectively combines the use of satire, an expert opinion and a rhetorical question, reinforced with an informative, yet subtly moralising tone. This particular tone is notable when combined with these techniques, as she made mention of the Australian Medical Association’s Dirty Ashtray Award when discussing the state’s lack of performance to tobacco control. She questions the Victorian State Government in a sarcastic, mocking tone, demanding an answer on when Victoria is going to step up to the issue. This is all backed up by an expert opinion, as it was the Australian Medical Association that awarded Victoria with such a title. This tone is very effective when combined with these techniques. The intended effect of these techniques through this tone is to inform the reader of just how bad this state is in regards to maintaining its hold on dealing with outdoor public smoking, through the eyes of the Australian Medical Association. This expert opinion is delivered to emphasise the fact that it is an issue that simply needs to be dealt with. Sharkie also has us doubt the durability of our State Government in dealing with this issue in order for us to put more faith in her contention.

The PGT model – people, groups and things – is used to argue that second hand smoking is exposing non-smokers to the many different health risks usually only found in smokers themselves.  The author refers to Melbourne as a city that was once ahead in tackling the issues of smoking however it is now lagging behind. This encourages the audience to view the issue as serious and concerning, to the point where it is causing health issues. This positions the audience to feel that this problem must be controlled by pressuring the government into introducing new legislations made by the Victorian Parliament. This is supported by statistics, expert opinion and solutions. Due to her qualifications; Sharkie is able to prompt the audience into supporting her arguments because she is an expert in this field. Through using her expertise and incorporating others, the article is informative, straight forward and doesn’t stray from the topic.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
ONE of the things Melbourne prides itself on is our cafe culture. Enjoying a coffee and a meal in the sunshine in one of Melbourne's many amazing eateries is one of the benefits of living in our great city.

But at the moment, that meal comes with a side serve of smoke. And it seems that Victorians have had enough.

A little over a month ago, the AMA Victoria and Asthma Foundation (Vic), Cancer Council Victoria, Heart Foundation Victoria and Quit Victoria launched the Keep Fresh Air Fresh campaign, which asked Victorians to send a submission to the state government consultation on proposed legislation to ban smoking in children's playgrounds, public pools, skate parks and at children's sporting events.

In only four weeks, almost 7000 Victorians sent their own submissions to the Government to tell them its proposed bans didn't go far enough and should be extended to include smokefree outdoor dining and drinking areas.

That included more than 250 cancer clinicians and respiratory specialists who see the devastating effects of smoking daily.

Victoria is the only state that has not introduced or announced an intention to ban smoking in outdoor dining and drinking areas. Last year, the Victorian Government was awarded the Australian Medical Association's Dirty Ashtray award for the worst-performing government in tobacco control. The question has to be asked: What is the State Government waiting for?

As long as smoking is allowed at the places where we eat out, we're exposed to the dangers of secondhand smoke, exposure to which increases the risk of chronic and fatal health conditions that include cardiovascular and heart disease and lung cancer.

Smokefree areas also help smokers to reduce their consumption and help quitters to avoid cues which prompt them to relapse.

Almost 4000 Victorians die of smoking-caused illness every year, so environments which help them to quit rather than take up smoking and set positive role modelling for children will translate to significant health benefits across the state.

Smokefree outdoor dining and drinking areas have already been successfully implemented in a number of states, including Queensland, where a review found one in four smokers was prompted to try to quit as a result of the new laws.

The laws also helped business, with 34 per cent of people reporting they were visiting outdoor dining areas more often now they could eat without a serve of smoke. We've seen the same effect in Gippsland, where Baw Baw Shire Council has implemented smokefree outdoor dining and drinking areas after a successful year-long trial.

A survey found more than 80 per cent of businesses said there had been no effect or a positive one as a result of smokefree outdoor dining and drinking areas. It also found strong support from the community (73 per cent) and business (71 per cent), which is consistent with Cancer Council Victoria research which found seven out of 10 Victorians supported smokefree outdoor dining and drinking areas.

In an interview with Channel Seven, Baw Baw restaurateur Daniel Zemunik explained the business case was pretty simple when the vast majority of Victorians don't smoke.

"People who don't smoke are far more attracted to come to a place where they know there is going to be definitely no smoking either inside or out," he said.

By extending proposed legislation to smokefree outdoor dining and drinking areas, it will allow for streamlined implementation and public education rather than a piecemeal approach which will be harder to execute.

Victoria was once a leader on tobacco control but now we have a lack of progress. With backing from the public and the medical community, and evidence in favour of change, there is no reason to wait.

The State Government must take immediate action and legislate for a statewide ban on smokefree outdoor dining and drinking areas.

Victorians deserve to breathe easier when eating out.
Fiona Sharkie is the executive director of Quit Victoria
Originally published as Outdoor diners want smoke off menu

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
ONE of the things Melbourne prides itself on is our cafe culture. Enjoying a coffee and a meal in the sunshine in one of Melbourne's many amazing eateries is one of the benefits of living in our great city. But at the moment, that meal comes with a side serve of smoke.