PAPER C
http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/RL33591.pdf
WATCO U.S. aid to African countries on the recipient African countries?
CLAIM: U.S. aid to African countries has been various and ineffective.
REASON: The fluctuating ideals in congress about how much and what kind of aid in combination with an unstable continent makes U.S. efforts largely ineffective.
Argument: This is mostly an informative paper so it was really difficult to find an argument but I feel that the argument was that the U.S. is not as effective in its aid to Africa because it doesn’t allocate enough or in the right places.
Audience: This is a report by the Congressional Research Service, so the audience is members of the U.S. Congress.
Goal: Mostly to inform members of Congress of the U.S. aid situation in Africa but also to persuade them to change aid policies to focus more on humanitarian aid and aid through multilateral organizations/initiatives.
How:
This definitely appeals to logos and ethos, seeing as it is very informative and cites many resources and is very logical in the way it is presented. Ethos screams from every paragraph as it uses so many official documents as sources like other governmental documents, reports from the UN etc. I feel that logos is important because it is laid out in a solid format and the information used augments this feeling of “oh this makes sense to me we should do this.”
Typical: Very much so. This is very typical format for its audience. It is brief, logical and has many sources and it is very straight to the point. It is informative and its bias is not clearly evident; you have to really read it and stress over it like I did to get an argument.
Effective: I would say so. Because it is in a typical format and the bias is not evident I feel that it is more persuasive. If a member of Congress was reading this document (which they do) then they would not feel “pushed” into feeling a certain way. It is informative and persuasive in such a way that you don’t know that you are being persuaded…if that makes sense.
Friday, June 3, 2011
Friday, May 20, 2011
Speech analysis
I chose to do General MacArthur's farewell speech to West Point.
http://www.nationalcenter.org/MacArthurFarewell.html
This was given in 1962 long after he was fired from his post. He was the hero of WWII in the Pacific having won the famous battle of Midway. Then he almost single handedly lost the Korean War. Right afterwards Eisenhower dismissed him and as all good soldiers he certainly did fade away. This speech is very famous though because of its powerful and lasting effect it has had on our armed forces.
WATCO being a soldier on finding one's purpose in life.
Being a soldier gives you a sole purpose in life.
Being a soldier helps you fulfill your birth right to defend your nation against the perils that threaten it.
Audience: students at West Point
Argument: Being a soldier is an amazing opportunity and gives you purpose in life: duty, honor, country.
Goal: Encourage lasting patriotism in the soldiers' hearts and to show them their purpose in life.
How:
Wow pathos. MacArthur had a way with words. His rhetoric was stunning in this address; duty, honor, country are three words that have endured and encouraged armed forces ever since. Throughout his speech he uses several metaphors and repeated examples. He elaborates on points using strong words to fire your spirits and make you want to fight for God and country.
Ethos-He mentions Plato, "Only the dead have seen the end of war" as he talks about the soldiers duty in life to press on forever and to defend the country because there will always be some dark force threatening our beloved land. He also refers to his own experiences. MacArthur was a brilliant general in the Pacific theater and he won the war there for the U.S. He was a hero (until he lost the Korean War) but nevertheless by appealing to himself and his experiences as a soldier is a form of authority and legitimacy for his argument.
Sufficient: I think so. As I said before his rhetoric was amazing. The imagery he conjured and the feelings he evoked in his soldiers boosted their feeling of patriotism and love for their country. It was definitely sufficient in convincing them that their role is to fulfill their birth right and to be a soldier to fight until the end for their country.
Effective: Definitely. There is a reason why this is one of the most famous military speeches in American history because it was so effective and powerful
http://www.nationalcenter.org/MacArthurFarewell.html
This was given in 1962 long after he was fired from his post. He was the hero of WWII in the Pacific having won the famous battle of Midway. Then he almost single handedly lost the Korean War. Right afterwards Eisenhower dismissed him and as all good soldiers he certainly did fade away. This speech is very famous though because of its powerful and lasting effect it has had on our armed forces.
WATCO being a soldier on finding one's purpose in life.
Being a soldier gives you a sole purpose in life.
Being a soldier helps you fulfill your birth right to defend your nation against the perils that threaten it.
Audience: students at West Point
Argument: Being a soldier is an amazing opportunity and gives you purpose in life: duty, honor, country.
Goal: Encourage lasting patriotism in the soldiers' hearts and to show them their purpose in life.
How:
Wow pathos. MacArthur had a way with words. His rhetoric was stunning in this address; duty, honor, country are three words that have endured and encouraged armed forces ever since. Throughout his speech he uses several metaphors and repeated examples. He elaborates on points using strong words to fire your spirits and make you want to fight for God and country.
Ethos-He mentions Plato, "Only the dead have seen the end of war" as he talks about the soldiers duty in life to press on forever and to defend the country because there will always be some dark force threatening our beloved land. He also refers to his own experiences. MacArthur was a brilliant general in the Pacific theater and he won the war there for the U.S. He was a hero (until he lost the Korean War) but nevertheless by appealing to himself and his experiences as a soldier is a form of authority and legitimacy for his argument.
Sufficient: I think so. As I said before his rhetoric was amazing. The imagery he conjured and the feelings he evoked in his soldiers boosted their feeling of patriotism and love for their country. It was definitely sufficient in convincing them that their role is to fulfill their birth right and to be a soldier to fight until the end for their country.
Effective: Definitely. There is a reason why this is one of the most famous military speeches in American history because it was so effective and powerful
Friday, May 13, 2011
Don't tread on me...
5/13/11
http://www.mcnaughtonart.com/artwork/view_zoom/?artpiece_id=379
I would like to preface this by saying that this doesn’t necessarily represent my political views but I thought that it was a bit more interesting than the original forgotten man ☺
WATCO: What are the consequences of liberal wealth distribution politics on the American people?
CLAIM: Liberal government policies destroys the American dream.
REASON: Liberal government policies defames the American Constitution.
Argument: Obama’s (and previous liberal presidents) are destroying the American dream.
Audience: patriotic Americans who are more conservative
Goal: call attention to the forgotten man and the suffering American dream.
How:
Let’s start with ethos because it is the most obvious: the Constitution and the Founding Fathers of the United States plus presidents of the U.S. President Obama is stepping on the Constitution, the epitome of disrespect and disregard to the ultimate symbol of our great country. There are several presidents in the background divided into two camps—one in shock and horror and the other side clapping. This is an interesting dilemma of ethos because both sides are full of US presidents and so supposedly both sides have credibility. However it is interesting which presidents are on what sides. Abraham Lincoln, the man who saved our country and is one of the most famous presidents is looking pleading with the other camp to look at this suppressed man. Additionally there is George Washington who is also pointing to the man and his face is in disbelief almost that the other side has done this to the American dream. This is also pathos, the expressions on the presidents’ faces. The one camp hard and cold faced and celebrating Obama’s trampling of the Constitution and the other camp pleading to help this man and save the American dream.
Typical: I’m still a bit shaky in understanding this principal but I would say it is. The audience is patriotic, conservative Americans and one of the more popular slogans of this group right now is the famous quote from Benjamin Franklin “Don’t tread on me” and here president Obama is literally treading on “America.”
http://www.mcnaughtonart.com/artwork/view_zoom/?artpiece_id=379
I would like to preface this by saying that this doesn’t necessarily represent my political views but I thought that it was a bit more interesting than the original forgotten man ☺
WATCO: What are the consequences of liberal wealth distribution politics on the American people?
CLAIM: Liberal government policies destroys the American dream.
REASON: Liberal government policies defames the American Constitution.
Argument: Obama’s (and previous liberal presidents) are destroying the American dream.
Audience: patriotic Americans who are more conservative
Goal: call attention to the forgotten man and the suffering American dream.
How:
Let’s start with ethos because it is the most obvious: the Constitution and the Founding Fathers of the United States plus presidents of the U.S. President Obama is stepping on the Constitution, the epitome of disrespect and disregard to the ultimate symbol of our great country. There are several presidents in the background divided into two camps—one in shock and horror and the other side clapping. This is an interesting dilemma of ethos because both sides are full of US presidents and so supposedly both sides have credibility. However it is interesting which presidents are on what sides. Abraham Lincoln, the man who saved our country and is one of the most famous presidents is looking pleading with the other camp to look at this suppressed man. Additionally there is George Washington who is also pointing to the man and his face is in disbelief almost that the other side has done this to the American dream. This is also pathos, the expressions on the presidents’ faces. The one camp hard and cold faced and celebrating Obama’s trampling of the Constitution and the other camp pleading to help this man and save the American dream.
Typical: I’m still a bit shaky in understanding this principal but I would say it is. The audience is patriotic, conservative Americans and one of the more popular slogans of this group right now is the famous quote from Benjamin Franklin “Don’t tread on me” and here president Obama is literally treading on “America.”
Thursday, May 5, 2011
RA: Commercial Blog Post
I chose to analyse the Darth Vader Volkswagon car commercial
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=15LQxUj-SyI
TThis commercial's argument is quite clear: buy the new 2012 Passat. The target audience for this commercial is middle age people who are in the upper middle to high-income socio economic income bracket who have families. The goal is to persuade you to buy their new car by giving the audience a sneak peak at their upcoming car model.
I love this commercial most for its ethos. It’s higher source of authority? Star Wars and the lord Darth Vader himself! This target audience was the ones who went to see the Star Wars films when they were first released in theaters. These films are an integral part of American culture and it has had the most impact on the audience’s generation. When the child dresses up like Darth Vader and the music comes on, the audience has got to laugh because they are so familiar with this icon and also because their children have probably done similar things. This is also the commercial’s pathos—laughter. This small child trying to use the force while in his costume is hilarious. The audience can also sympathize with the parents who humor their child’s eccentricities and giggle along with them as the mother slides the sandwich to the kid as if it was the force bringing it to him or when the father starts the car with his keys and thereby making his kid feel like he started it by using the force. The commercial was not sufficient to persuade people to buy the car, but it was sufficient to spark interest in the car. This is because the car is only in 20ish seconds of the minute long commercial. The commercial focuses more on the child’s endeavors and leading up to the big moment when the father starts the car. The commercial was accurate; it showed correct information about the actual product. Its relevance is tricky to decipher—on one hand it is relevant to the audience but not necessarily to the topic of buying cars. Overall the commercial is not effective in making me want to buy the car but it was effective in sparking my interest and leaving a strong impression in my mind that may lead to me investigating the car.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=15LQxUj-SyI
TThis commercial's argument is quite clear: buy the new 2012 Passat. The target audience for this commercial is middle age people who are in the upper middle to high-income socio economic income bracket who have families. The goal is to persuade you to buy their new car by giving the audience a sneak peak at their upcoming car model.
I love this commercial most for its ethos. It’s higher source of authority? Star Wars and the lord Darth Vader himself! This target audience was the ones who went to see the Star Wars films when they were first released in theaters. These films are an integral part of American culture and it has had the most impact on the audience’s generation. When the child dresses up like Darth Vader and the music comes on, the audience has got to laugh because they are so familiar with this icon and also because their children have probably done similar things. This is also the commercial’s pathos—laughter. This small child trying to use the force while in his costume is hilarious. The audience can also sympathize with the parents who humor their child’s eccentricities and giggle along with them as the mother slides the sandwich to the kid as if it was the force bringing it to him or when the father starts the car with his keys and thereby making his kid feel like he started it by using the force. The commercial was not sufficient to persuade people to buy the car, but it was sufficient to spark interest in the car. This is because the car is only in 20ish seconds of the minute long commercial. The commercial focuses more on the child’s endeavors and leading up to the big moment when the father starts the car. The commercial was accurate; it showed correct information about the actual product. Its relevance is tricky to decipher—on one hand it is relevant to the audience but not necessarily to the topic of buying cars. Overall the commercial is not effective in making me want to buy the car but it was effective in sparking my interest and leaving a strong impression in my mind that may lead to me investigating the car.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)