I find this article very interesting as it
contradicts itself in a very “nice” manner. I was shocked to find out
that a peace prize was awarded to a person who caused war, instead of peace. Furthermore,
the committee that awarded this peace prize award was able to justify
themselves by throwing out “unbelievable” reasons. His ruthlessness was painted
in a different light by the committee and praised to the extent that the
purpose of going to war was an applaudable one. This article is trying to provoke
sarcasm to the Putin’s prime minister in a very polite manner. The mere action
of holding of a news conference on China International Peace Studies Center, but
yet there was little reporting in the Chinese news media about the award, shows
the unimportance of publicizing this award to the Chinese people. Whereas, twitter
was utilized to spread this award, clearly illustrates the target audience that
the committee is aiming at- the rest of the world, in particular tapping on the
strength of the social media. According
to the last year’s winner, Lien Chan, the award wasn’t properly explained and publicized
to him, at least. Therefore, this again reflects the sincerity and importance
of this award to the awardee. Towards the end of the article, I have the
feeling that the original meaning of prizes has evolved in this context and has
undertaken a complex nature. Whereby, the awarding of a prize may not
necessarily carry the good nature of it. Hence, I conclude that this award
appears to be more of a jeer than a true award, for its purpose.