Essay Questions

1. Will we be graded more on grammar, spelling, etc. or content? 2. Should we include outside facts in our essay, or does that count as outside influences affecting our opinions of the ad? 3. How do we know the line separating opinion and description?

Muslim Rage

The cover photo of this story is the clear attention grabber; it presents two Islamic-looking gentlemen who appear to be in outrage. No doubt, this was in retaliation of the recent youtube video released making fun of Muhammad. However, instead of anger on their face, it appears to be desperation; these men seem as if they are looking for attention with all their hearts. The title presents a very different point saying "And How I Survived It", and the fact that this was written by a woman makes the pathos that much stronger. The inferior stature women are given in this society allows the reader to have a much stronger reaction to the story itself. In the image, the two men are clenching an American flag in their fists as they scream for their beliefs. This causes an instant reaction from American viewers, possibly reemphasizing the constant sterotype of violent terrorists such as the ones pictured. The style of the photo forces the viewer that these men are in a rage, and looking for some sort of physical retribution. On the other hand, the humorous Twitter responses from Middle Eastern people try to present a less aggressive outlook. They instantly have logos because they are from the country being made fun of, and pathos is present because they are trying to their audiences emotions through humor. This is a very effective way to change people's outlook on the Middle East. Overall, the photo and Twitter post present very contrasting ideas. One is of Muslim rage and anger, while, Twitter presents the more open-minded outlook of the people. For me, the Twitter post are more affective. Although, they are not posted in such reliable sources, they present a real world impression from normal people. Both topics are important, but deciding between the two is the real decision.

"The Choice" Obama TV Ad

In this video, Obama instantly grabs our attention with his relaxed, but confident body posture, and strong voice. He is speaking straight into the camera in what appears to be in a living room setting, as if he is speaking one-on-one with the viewer from his home. The ad promoted a message that was summarized with a one text at the end of the video, FORWARD. President Obama is trying to convince us, the viewers, to believe in him and his plan to fix the counrty. He supports his plan of supporting the middle class with brief videos of him meeting with automotive workers, students, and other groups of "normal" people. This upfront, personal technique toward convincing us to vote for him a second term, makes Obama seem genuine and confident in not only himself, but the country he is trying to move forward.

"The Choice" - Obama For America TV Ad

• The first visual elements to gra my attention are of President Obama, alone, speaking straight into the camera talking about "two different plans for country". Then, short clips of Obama meeting with people accompany is narrative.
• The setting Obama is in, a normal looking living room, makes it seem as if he is at home speaking one-on-one with the viewer.
• The most important point is choosing to support either the middle class with Obama's plan or try the upper class waterfall affect of Romney's plan.
• As I said before the living room affect, and the slow tempo piano music in the video seems like it trying to make Obama's speaking sound genuine and personal.
• The short clips of group meetings, factory workers, and students make it obvious that Obama is saying these are the jobs and methods he wants to promote.
• Text is provided in the short clips to accompany his words, along with one word at the end of the video: FORWARD. This implies that Obama believes his plan is what will move the country in the right direction, forward.
• I assume this video is directed more towards white and mostly older Americans due to the fact that is where Obama is least favored among voters and he is shown meeting with many white elders in the video.

Choices 2.0 Chapter 6 Precis

In his book, Choices 2.0: Situations for College Writing, Joe Marshall Hardin claims that mass media viewers need to educated their minds to better access the use of rhetoric in advertising. He eupports this statement with such successful advertisements as the "Marlboro Cowboy", and how cowboys, a type of mythical hero in our culture, are used to represent a type of manliness to increase sells. Hardin wishes to make his readers more aware of these advertising techniques not in order to stop one from watching advertisements, but in order to give readers the ability to separate their wants from their needs when watching the pitch of a product. Due to the fact that Harlin states in his text that children are unable to properly access ads, it is clear he is talking to all other ages in a informational, but assertive tone.

Photo Analysis

http://www.facebook.com/#!/photo.php?fbid=441841012523595&set=pb.258837190823979.-2207520000.1347424605&type=1&theater

The first thing one can notice about this photo is the brain with a needle sticking from it, and a bullet being shot through as it makes a face of pure shock and anguish. The brain is obviously the most important item in the photo, but the contrast between the pasty, white brain with the blood stricken walls surrounding can only make the minor details more clear. Surrounding the brain image are a large amount of what seems to be random, but under closer speculation it appears the words seemed to be organized into a number of contrasting ideas that the normal human being seem seem to despise such as war or greed.  Behind the brain, an "I" is emerging through the torn veins that developed. At first, I believed the message of this photo was to say that the "I" in all of us emerges when we allow ourselves to be overcome by hate and gluttony, but the title "I Remain" that accompanied the photo made me think that this photo is saying that even through all the hate and gluttony in the world, one must be able to still recognize themselves at the end of the day. Whether that be physically or mentally, we must keep our identity as a human being.

Plagiarism Lines Blur Precis

In his New York Times article, "Plagiarism Lines Blur for Students in Digital Age", Trip Gabriel claims that the decreasingly harsh punishment on student plagiarism is diminishing creativity thanks to the availability of an infinite amount of sourcelss information on the internet. Gabriel supports this with personal stories of students excused for their "misunderstood" use of plagiarism, examples of how it is somewhat accepted in today's society like in the case of Helene Hegemann, and then concluded with the opinions of college students and professors about how this accepted use of plagiarism is diluting the uniqueness of student's writing. His purpose was to convince readers to be more aware of their plagiarism is order to not only improve  their writing, but also to maintain their individuality. The author appears to have a  worried tone , so it appears he is talking to not only college-aged students, but also to younger students.

Romney vs. Obama Visual Analysis

    Each one of these videos had their own personal, unique arguments; Obama's first impression was to focus on what he has done, and what he is trying to do for the economy and the country, while, Romney wishes to stake his claim for president based on how he has lived his life. The initial visual impression in Obama's video was of the declining economy, natural disasters, and horrific events such as 9/11 quickly followed by automotive workers and school classrooms amongst brief moments of men and women's everyday lives. These visuals were accompanied by the narrating of a man saying that America has fought through diversity and hardship before -much like Obama is trying to do now- immediately proceded by Bill Clinton and Michelle Obama's commentary defending and supporting the decisions made during Obama's campaign as president. As the video progresses, it is made clear that some of these were made based on Obama's family values; images of his grandparents, his children -including a close-up on his wedding ring- ,automotive workers, and hospitals were shown. The support for these pictures was that healthcare costs had to go down and automotive jobs go up to help the middle class because Obama believes that these people, people like his grandparents, are the backbone of the country. The video then concluded with the story and images of the decision made by President Obama to pursue and kill Osama Bin Laden; this was basically America's rally cry against 9/11, and reemphasized the video's claim that he, Barack Obama, can fight through hardships, like America, with the support of the American people.
   Romney's video opened with the visuals of a fire burning and exploding fireworks accompanied by the dialogue that he can see the country "roaring" in the future. Images of olympic athletes, and descriptions of his push for the Salt Lake City Olympics. Quickly after was Mitt and Ann's fight through her MS diagnosis, and Ann's promise that if there's anyone you can trust your life and country with, it's Mitt Romney. The importance of family was expressed through home videos of Mitt, Ann, and their children, legitmizing them as a real, normal, family. The next topic was Romney's idealization of his father, and the passing on his father's love of family and people-based political authority. The video followed this lead with interviews of the Staples owner, and Massachusetts member speaking about the drive of Romney. He then spoke briefly about turning around the economic crisis in that state. The video concluded with exploding fireworks and Romney meeting with American people, almost as if to say that with the support of the American people, he can make America roar into something beautiful.

   

Romney vs. Obama

     Michelle Obama and Ann Romney each gave a speech to convince voters to cast their vote for their husbands Barack Obama and Mitt Romney. Each was full of a great deal of pathos, but varied in their approach towards to the audience. First, Ann Romney said she was there “to talk about love.”  Romney’s speech was very dedicated to talking about how genuine her husband was, and even opened her speech by asking the audience to think about the recent hurricane.  Quotes such as, “what Mitt Romney and I have is a real marriage”, or “Mitt wasn’t handed success, he built it”, only add to her use of pathos. The audience clearly reacted to this pathos with chants throughout the speech praising Ann.  Logos was scattered scarcely throughout the speech with little reference to Mitt’s former work.

     Michelle Obama countered with her own genuine story about her family. Obama not only talked of her father being a pump operator, but  her husband’s mother being just as hard working, which is the reason why he is so set on helping the middle class. This added to pathos and well as her logos. Throughout the speech she said such things as “women can make their own choices”, and “doing the impossible is the history of America” that personally gave me chills. Michelle’s genuine story about her and Barack’s struggling to get through school, and to help the poor instead of join the reach added not only to her pathos, but also her ethos.  The crowd also went into chants with her inspiring words.

   Both speeches were full of emotional appeals, and being neutral it was easy to be unbiased. However, the tone and content of Romney’s speech made it easy to side with Obama. Michelle Obama was even able to bring the crowd to tears with her words, while, Romney seemed to say many “cliché” phrases to inspire the crowd. All of Romney’s appeals seemed to be by use of pathos with little logos; Obama seemed to be able to use logos, pathos, and ethos in her speech.

Choices 2.0 Chapter 3

In chapter 3 of his book "Choices 2.0: Situations for college writing", Joe Marshall Hardin claims that in order to make a good argument,a writer must be willing to not only support his or her own credibility, but also the credibility of the argument in question. Hardin supports this theory by emphasizing the points of how personal stories, narrative, and credible sources can all add or dilute the ethos, logos, or pathos of a writer's argument based on such little cues as the lack of description or the format of an opionated sentence. In order to accomplish this goal, Hardin gave examples such as the argument over adult literacy programs using such step-by-step procedures of the Toulmin method to contrast the difference between a good and bad argument. On account of Hardin's continued use of college students as an audience in his text and his consistent reference to student projects, it's assumed he is talking to a younger audience looking to improve their argumentative skills.

The Web Means the End of Forgetting

This NY Times article presents the claim that anything posted either accidentally or purposely on the internet will never be forgotten nor forgiven, and that should change. The author states that in today's society, 75% of recruiters and human-resource professionals are required to do online searches of candidates, and 70% of those companies don't hire based on those searches. This is re-illustrated into a real world situation in the story of  a young woman, who just before receiving her teaching degree, was seen in an online photo wearing a pirates hat with the caption "Drunken Pirate". As a result, the woman was denied her degree and kicked out of school. As absurd as this story may sound, the author says it best when he says, "...people aren't worried about fake information posted by others, they're worried about true information they've posted about themselves...". Perhaps, this is why people should be more forgiving about the internet reputations of their fellow peers. As Alessandro Acquisti, a professor at Carnegie Mellon University, says, positive information is much easier to forget than negative information. There are many educated opinions by such authors, scholars, and professors as: Jonathan Zittrain, Paul Ohm, Daniel Solve, and Ryan Calo from Harvard, CU Boulder, George Washington and Stanford University emphasizing the theory that the internet should be more forgetful. There was also a story told about the Babylonia Talmud culture saying that this civilization believed that every word they spoken would fly to the heavenly cloud. However, had sinners properly asked God for forgiveness, their miscues could be forgotten. The author claims that should be the same treatment of internet users. As the "Drunken Pirate" misunderstanding, will show, only people that truly know our personalities and our norm can honestly judge us based off of our digital profiles. Although it is a very opinionated article, its large supply of Ethos and Logos supply a well organized argument to make the internet "forget" our minor miscues.