Comparing Essays

Things About Sprigg’s Essay We Noticed

• Spriggs addressed the other points of views well and gave a bit of evidence even supporting the other side.
• She proved the evidence wrong, which built up her credibility.
• Sprigg’s argument didn’t have very solid facts, since her idea that she wanted to discuss is not something you can prove or disprove.
• Sprigg’s pictures added a good contrast for the farms.

Things About Our Essays We Noticed

• In Jacob’s essay, his author had a phD which made the author a bit more credible. His phD was in psychology (we think).
• In Jacob’s essay there is evidence and facts. There is a lot of solid facts, since the topic of school starting later is a tangible idea.
• Jacob’s essay had a very small counter argument. Same with Chloe’s. Same with Corben’s
• Corben’s essay was a very opinionated review, and there really wasn’t a counter argument for his paper. The counter argument would be not to buy it, but so far there hasn’t been a counter argument.
• Chloe’s essay didn’t have pictures, but if you had pictures of the topic “animal essay” it might be too graphic and scare people away.
• Riley did not have an essay, but has created a survey to collect personal responses.

Analyzing A Short Paper

In my paper by Lone Star College on Animal Testing, even in their title their purpose for the paper and position is clear. They want animal testing to stop. From the very beginning of their paper, the author Heather Dunnuck clearly states people feel differently about animals, and some of them agree with the topic even though she disagrees. It is obvious why the topic matters, should lives of animals be used to further progress for humans, or should their lives be spared and treated with respect. This hits the hearts of every pet owner and more. It effects everyone whether or not animals are used, since not using them could slow science. She continually mentions this point, and continually shoots it down by appealing to ethos and pathos, since it is an emotional topic. One of the sources cited said "animal [experimentation] is morally wrong no matter how much humans may benefit because the animal's basic right has been infringed. Risks are not morally transferable to those who do not choose to take them" (qtd. in Orlans 26.) The idea that the logical choice is to experiment on animals doesn't make it right, but it makes it harder to argue against. Her arguments are reduced to illogical appeals  which do however appeal to the reader. Animal testing has been a heated topic since it first started, and she responds as well as she can to the claims by doing her research and giving background information when it is needed.

Thinking About Buying Local

1. The first thing that made me think her topic was important, was the number of sources she had. To completely defend and fairly present the opposing side, she had over ten sources, meaning that this is an idea that many people have an input on and that as an unbiased viewer, that I should get involved.
2. The first counter argument she put into her paper was that buying locally could have a negative environmental impact, but since it is less efficient to grow foods in areas that don't grow the foods well. She answered this argument by saying that you don't have to buy everything from local farmers, but "as much as possible from local farmers." (page 97) Later she answers the argument that bigger farms are more efficient, by pointing out they had their facts wrong. She clarifies that the bigger farms are more efficient in one crop per acre, while small farms are more efficient in multiple per acre. (page 97) Then comes the argument that buying food from third world countries is better for the environment. She says in response that only a little bit of the American diet is exported, and if we exploited the third world they would industrialize and we would have a problem all over again. (page 97-98) She notes that while the global economy is hurt by buying local, many local economies benefit, and we shouldn't be condoning sweatshops. (page 98)
3. When Spriggs mentions the negative impact on the global economy, I don't think her persuasion is very effective in this section. While it is true that we should try to minimize sweatshops, that was her only piece of evidence that persuaded me very much, and that was more of an emotional claim than one based on logic. She appeals to the readers point of view, knows what she's talking about, we understand that the topic matters, but at the end of the day this point did not have very good evidence, and that made it a weak argument.
4. The pictures give a good contrast to how things are normally done compared to how our food could be grown in the future and more of how it was in the past, showing the changes that would need to occur to get to where she wants.

Topic for Paper 3

I did a persuasive speech in my public speaking class about why we should use alternatives to depression medication instead of depression medication.

Discussion of The Homework

Drinking PSA

• The after effects of two sisters who were young passengers of a girl driving drunk. The two older sisters, 15 and 17, died but the 13 year old lived.
• Used a guilt trip to persuade you by not being able to experience graduation, prom, becoming valedictorian, getting their driver’s license etc.
• Had perspectives from people at the fire station who had seen a bit of the same thing before. Another person outside of the family
• Music is very powerful and adds to the pathos appeals.
• Added more pathos through the dates of how long the girls lived, and videos of their lives when they were young and happy. The parents were devastated, and you could relate really well to the ad because of the age and the sadness in general.
• Logos = death
• The big message is not to make a big mistake, which is a call to action.

Texting PSA

• Shouldn’t text while you drive, because you could die.
• They targeted the younger audience who texts
• About the girl who died the day before her graduation… her family celebrated her birthdays after she had died and it connected really well with anyone who has lost a loved one and was a good pathos appeal
• Ethos was built through the police officer having experience with texting and driving cases before, and the families testimonies.
• The pictures of the girls who died added a lot of pathos and the memorials at their death sites.

Texting and Driving Appeals

In the campaign done by AT&T about Texting and Driving, you see appeals of all three types in the video. In an emotional sense, there is pathos even in the topic choice. The video is about three families of people who's lives were effected by texting and driving. One of the girls was going to graduate the next day when she died. As a college student and close to the girl's age, it really struck me that it could happen to anyone. These pathos appeals make you listen a bit more intently, since you are emotionally involved in the ad if the appeal is used well. There is also a  trust in the sources credibility. The ethos appeals were shown through the police officer at the scene and AT&T. They proved they were credible sources through experience interviewing these families and working as a police officer, seeing it often. Having testimonies from the family themselves and hearing about the impact it had on the people responsible and/or the family members who lost a loved one also made AT&T's sources more credible. Finally, the logic brings the whole thing together. At the end of the day, there is a chance that whenever you text you could get in an accident. Even at it's least harmful, swerving on an empty road, it should still be a reality check for how close the person was to being harmed. Texting and driving has killed people, and it will continue to do so. The easiest way to avoid it is not to text and drive.

Yes, We Can.

The video, even though a few years old, still inspires me. Free and accessible to anyone who has a computer, it is a very hope filled video. Quite literally, with words coming up such as "Yes, we can," "hope," and "change," it brought a sense of pride in our country if it was going to change into something great. As celebrity after celebrity entered the video, it made them seem not so super and human just like us. That everyone is always striving for a better world, and that since we all have this in common we are all equal. As some of the people in the video started to sing I thought it was so beautiful to hear so many voices sharing a positive message at once, and not just in English. In a few other languages spoken, and in ASL signed, it reinforced that we are all the same and fighting for the same cause, all we needed to do was work together. Since this cause is unfortunately not brought up enough and fought for often, it was amazing to see so many famous people binding together to form a call to action to the millions of people in our nation. Following the speech by Obama in 2008, "Yes, we can," in the end of the black-and-white video the word hope changed to vote written in red, and the presence of color made it seem much more important. It was well done, and a very convincing way to show that Obama was the way to change.