http://music.aol.com/video/clumsy/fergie/1999775
Audience: Female teenagers and young adults, who are fans of Fergie and watch music videos. Mostly girls who are clumsy themselves or don't know how to act in front of boys.
Arguement: WATCO of being 'in love' on girls', and Fergie's, clumsiness?
Claim: Being 'in love' makes girls, even Fergie, very clumsy.
Reason: Paying attention to the boy you (or Fergie) are in love with distracts you from what is going on around you.
Goal: Make Fergie seem just like every other girl, who makes mistakes when 'in love,' in order to gain more fans, or strengthen the ones she has.
How:
Sufficient: The music video shows five different incidents where she makes a big, clumsy mistake because the guy she's crushing on is there, and she becomes distracted. This is a good amount of evidence that he really has this affect on her.
Ethos: Fergie is a very popular singer so the audience already values her opinion and she is in the music video herself. In every different situation the music video shows her in, she starts out looking like the Diva her audience knows her as, beautiful and in charge: on stage, on the runway, driving the car, controlling the space port, etc. Even though she is oh so amazing, she crumbles whenever the boy comes around. If this happens to her when she is around her crush, then it makes it seem like a normal girl has no chance of being stable when around their boy.
Pathos: Seeing Fergie in a position where she is embarrassed, has messed things up, and in trouble, makes her feel more personal and they will be able to relate to her. This way they can compare what is happening to her in the music video to their own life, this will also increase Fergie's popularity with her audience. Also, since the music video is filmed so that it appears like a storybook, it makes it feel like what is happening to her is inevitable, you will turn the page, and she will fall of the stage no matter what. Her clumsiness is definite.
Effective: I think the music video is pretty effective. It makes it seem like most girls will be like Fergie and become clumsy when around their crush. This will increase the goal of increasing Fergie's fans because it is something that most girls can relate to.
Monday, March 23, 2009
Saturday, March 14, 2009
Argument: WATCO having a spring break on BYU student's emotional health.
Claim: Having a spring break will improve students emotional health.
Reason: Having a spring break will allow students to spend time relaxing outside which helps them fight winter blues.
Audience: BYU administration: Mormon middle/older aged (mostly) men who don't want to add a spring break.
Goal: get BYU to have a spring break.
How:
Pathos: the reader learns about those who suffer from SAD and feels sorry for what they have to deal with. It makes them feel guilty for not giving students a break to get out and enjoy the spring sun.
Relevant: the argument isn't super relevant. It mostly talks about students who suffer from SAD, and most students don't suffer from this. Also, the administration isn't going to feel responsible for students' emotional health, that is a doctor's, the parent's, or the student's job.
Accurate: The information talked about is accurate, and the reader wouldn't feel like anything is completely incorrect. However, it fails to talk about the different ways students will spend spring break-they aren't all going to use it to enjoy the outdoors like it talks about. It needs to address those who will do homework or play video games or sleep all day, etc.
Effective: While it may bring to the attention of the Admin the issue of SAD and how a spring break can help emotional health, it's not going to convince them to make a spring break.
Claim: Having a spring break will improve students emotional health.
Reason: Having a spring break will allow students to spend time relaxing outside which helps them fight winter blues.
Audience: BYU administration: Mormon middle/older aged (mostly) men who don't want to add a spring break.
Goal: get BYU to have a spring break.
How:
Pathos: the reader learns about those who suffer from SAD and feels sorry for what they have to deal with. It makes them feel guilty for not giving students a break to get out and enjoy the spring sun.
Relevant: the argument isn't super relevant. It mostly talks about students who suffer from SAD, and most students don't suffer from this. Also, the administration isn't going to feel responsible for students' emotional health, that is a doctor's, the parent's, or the student's job.
Accurate: The information talked about is accurate, and the reader wouldn't feel like anything is completely incorrect. However, it fails to talk about the different ways students will spend spring break-they aren't all going to use it to enjoy the outdoors like it talks about. It needs to address those who will do homework or play video games or sleep all day, etc.
Effective: While it may bring to the attention of the Admin the issue of SAD and how a spring break can help emotional health, it's not going to convince them to make a spring break.
Saturday, March 7, 2009
IC3
http://www.nw3c.org/pressroom/docs/current/2009_01_05_unauthorized_charges.pdf
Audience: Americans who have a checking account and an email account, especially those who tend to open any email they receive even if they don't know who it's from.
Argument: WATCO opening an email from someone you don't know on the likely hood that you will be a victim of fraudulent checking account charges.
Claim: Opening an email from a stranger increases the likely hood that you will be a victim of fraudulent charges.
Reason: Because by opening an email from a stranger you increase the likelihood that it will contain malware that will allow unauthorized users access to private bank accounts and other information.
Goal: Get people to stop opening emails from people they don't know so that they won't be victims of internet crime.
How:
Logos: They appeal to ones logic that if you don't open emails from sources you don't know then you won't open an email that has malware on it. It's a very simple solution. It is also a problem that people easily understand: People are stealing money in a way that is hard to notice, and I don't want this to happen to me.
Ethos: They build a relationship of legitimacy with the reader by having the official looking logo at the top of the paper, and they give several different contacts and links so you can see if this is a legitimate agency. Also, they recommend first reporting any incidents to the police, and then to this agency. Americans naturally trust law enforcement agencies and regard them as legitimate organizations that are there to stop crime. Also, they say what the email has contained, including an 800 number, so it seems less likely that they are making it up.
Sufficiency: The article says that there have been 400 reported incidents of this happening, so it is obviously a widespread problem. They also give examples of people who have been refunded the money, but how there are many who don't even notice the charges. The audience knows that this is a problem that they should worry about and seek to avoid.
Effective: I think those who read this will be more cautious about what email they are opening up and will keep an eye out for signs of being a victim of such a crime.
Audience: Americans who have a checking account and an email account, especially those who tend to open any email they receive even if they don't know who it's from.
Argument: WATCO opening an email from someone you don't know on the likely hood that you will be a victim of fraudulent checking account charges.
Claim: Opening an email from a stranger increases the likely hood that you will be a victim of fraudulent charges.
Reason: Because by opening an email from a stranger you increase the likelihood that it will contain malware that will allow unauthorized users access to private bank accounts and other information.
Goal: Get people to stop opening emails from people they don't know so that they won't be victims of internet crime.
How:
Logos: They appeal to ones logic that if you don't open emails from sources you don't know then you won't open an email that has malware on it. It's a very simple solution. It is also a problem that people easily understand: People are stealing money in a way that is hard to notice, and I don't want this to happen to me.
Ethos: They build a relationship of legitimacy with the reader by having the official looking logo at the top of the paper, and they give several different contacts and links so you can see if this is a legitimate agency. Also, they recommend first reporting any incidents to the police, and then to this agency. Americans naturally trust law enforcement agencies and regard them as legitimate organizations that are there to stop crime. Also, they say what the email has contained, including an 800 number, so it seems less likely that they are making it up.
Sufficiency: The article says that there have been 400 reported incidents of this happening, so it is obviously a widespread problem. They also give examples of people who have been refunded the money, but how there are many who don't even notice the charges. The audience knows that this is a problem that they should worry about and seek to avoid.
Effective: I think those who read this will be more cautious about what email they are opening up and will keep an eye out for signs of being a victim of such a crime.
Monday, March 2, 2009
Guernica
Audience: Military and political leaders who have the power to stop the Civil war going on in Spain in 1937 but don't feel the need to stop it.
Argument: WATCO war on the the lives of innocent civilians
Claim: War wreaks havoc on innocent civilian lives.
Reason: Because opposing forces attack civilians and murder them mercilessly.
Goal: Bring the Spanish Civil War to an end.
How:
Pathos: Picasso definitely appeals to the viewer's sense of horror at the scene. The figures are choppy and there is hard to tell where there are limbs and and what is animal and what is human. The figure laying on the ground is not attached to his arm, and the figure on the right is being devoured by flames-both horrific images. The painting is done totally in black, grays, and white. These drab colors are lifeless and enhance the overwhelming feeling of death. The woman on the left is grieving for her dead child that she holds in her arms. The audience can't help but feel a great deal of sadness for this woman. Every facial expression, human or animal, portrays some sort of extreme emotion (sadness, pain, shock, fear, etc) and he replaces tongues with daggers to signify screams coming from their lips. The effect of the painting is a shock to the emotions.
Ethos: Pable Picasso is and was a very well known artist. So, the audience could trust that if he painted something, then it was of importance and worth. Also, this painting was of a specific event, the bombing of Guernica, he didn't just make it up, it actually happened.
Relevant: The painting is very relevant since he started painting it within fifteen days of the actual bombing. Spain was still in the middle of their Civil War, and he wanted it stopped. Many people probably knew someone who had died or had been effected by this particular bombing, and were still suffering from the war.
Effective: I'm not sure if this painting helped stop the war, but it seems like it would be pretty effective to me. It also went on a world tour soon after he finished, so it became very popular fast. I'm positive that it made an impact.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)