REBRANDING LONDON

Introduction

2. Method : Commenting on 2 documents

Stage 1: introduction - Presenting the documents
Similarities: These documents both / these 2 documents / this corpus of documents, show the advantages and drawback of the regeneration, that is to say redevelopment, renovation, of the Bronx, an inner city neighbourhood, on a local scale in New York City, a major city of the USA, a developed country.
Differences: The article from the New York Times by Jake Mooney published on 24 July 2012 focuses on one redevelopment project while the poster by the Bronx documentary center advertises the 1st annual Bronx gentrification conference which took place on December 7, 2013.
Announce structure: In a first part, we are going to analyse the pros of regeneration and in a second part I'm going to describe the cons of regenerating this neighbourhood.

Stage 2: Analysing the documents

DESCRIBE THE DOCS - What you see
structured (≠ parts) and detailed description		 Structure INTERPRET THE DOCS - What you know
add & structure definitions of key notions

Article:
§P1 A deprived neighbourhood
2 derelict industrial buildings & 1 tow station (eco) => wasteland (enviro), bad housing+crime: unsafe for families socio)
§P2 The planned regeneration
Shops (eco), quality low and middle income housing (socio), gardens (enviro)

1.The pros of regeneration:
- a deprived area
Article P1
- sustainably regenerated
Article P2

 1. a. A deprived area which needed it:
- Economic crisis: decline of manufacturing eco, less or unskilled jobs => low standard of living
- Social inequality: derelict housing, dangerous neighbourhood => low quality of life
- Environmental dereliction: brownfield site
1. b. A sustainable regeneration:
- Eco growth: low end services
- Social inclusion: mixed housing
- Enviro improvement: green city, public spaces
Poster:
- Top & bottom: basic conference info
- Middle: criticism of gentrification: with high-rise tower blocks probably deprived knocked over by big fist with $ sign representing affluent incomers		 2. The cons:
social exclusion
Poster		 2. But in fact socially unsustainable:
Gentrification: return of high-income groups to the inner-city => low-income groups excluded

Stage 3: Concluding
Assess docs (reliable/biased justified): To conclude, these documents are reliable (full references) ; the article is balanced (shows the positive & negative) so unbiased but the poster is biased as it criticizes gentrification.
Sum-up ideas (+ nuance/opening): They show that an inner city neighbourhood can regenerate to offer a better quality of life but sustainably is difficult to achieve socially which could create tensions between the locals and the newcomers.