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.
