During the commentary the author describes many different people and activities that take place. The observer infers that these are what they are from their face value, yet presents an example where two adults take a child for a ride. The author describes this as a family going out driving due to the assumption that two adults and a child are a family completing a mundane daily task, and so that is what it is inferred to be (Stephen Hester, David Francis, 2003 ). Then they state that this everyday scene could be interpreted differently. This normal scene could be interpreted not as a happy family going for a Sunday drive, but rather as possible kidnappers of the child by the adults. So what is it that makes us think something ordinary and mundane is happening rather than something with more criminal intent? Stephen Hester and David Francis (2003) describe this through a process in which we report the ordinary scene that makes the most sense. This is then transformed into an argument and an attempt is made to provide for its production (Stephen Hester, David Francis,