RA Source for paper C

http://www.apa.org/science/psa/sb-anderson.html

This paper is heavily informative and research based, so it doesn't include much of the writer's personal views except as research rather than opinion. That makes it so that the paper can be used be meant for a large audience, whether it's people who are decidedly against it or people who are just curious about the topic.

It starts out of course with an appeal to ethos by the bio detailing the writer's extensive schooling and work on the subject. Even the picture could be seen as an appeal to ethos, because it gives you a face behind the words, and he clearly looks intelligent, like a Professor.

Then there's the introduction which gives a bit of background to the debate. The body labels several myths and then follows them with facts. This provides an easy way for people to read the paper. While it can be said that the facts are just facts and not one-sided, the paper itself is clearly one-sided because there are no myths from the other side that are addressed. The list only includes misconceptions saying generally that violence in video games isn't that bad, but doesn't give any examples of myths on the side of why violence IS so bad. I think that is probably the paper's biggest weakness, that it does not sufficiently address counter arguments.

Of course, after the myth-fact section there is a part labeled "unanswered questions" which shows in a way humility on the writers part by him pointing out that he doesn't know everything. This helps to address counterarguments but is still insufficient. I think those reading the paper who have conflicting views with his would see the lack of a rounded argument. However, readers coming to the paper merely out of curiosity would probably walk away very much on his side.

Speech RA

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0106611/quotes

This is a link to a quotes page for the movie "Cool Runnings". The part that I wanted to discuss is a scene that is quoted on this page where John Candy's charachter goes to talk to the board of directors for bobsledding at the Olympic games. The reason for it is that his team has just been disqualified based on embarrassment to the sport. The speech is pretty short, but I think it carries a lot of substance.

The scene begins with the character, Irwin, charging into the office very upset. The quoted part on this page starts a little after the scene actually begins. He asks a little bit for their reasonings and gets even more upset when their main reason is the problem of embarrassment, despite the fact that his team qualified based on time. He turns the argument around on them and shows them how childish their complaint is by saying "I'm sorry, I didn't realize four black men in a bobsled could make you blush!" Then he focuses in on the head of the board, who happens to be his old coach and relates what he feels is probably the main reason behind his team's expulsion: His old coach wanted payback for Irwin cheating back when they went to the Olympics and having their gold medal taken away. He lays it all out, so that everyone is on the same page and understands the issue. This to me is a form of logos, because by clearly stating the issues the problem can be seen from a more logical perspective.

He then makes what I see as another appeal to logos by saying that if they should just disqualify him, the coach, and not his whole team, which based on points already made, is a logical argument. Then he turns to pathos, by bringing up that his guys have done everything that was asked of them with everyone laughing in their faces. You can't help but feel sorry for those guys and definitely guilt if you're the one who was laughing at them. The next appeal to logos is to the feeling of pride that comes with the Olympic games, especially for people who head and organize the program. He reminds them of what the games are all about, and says that by doing what they're doing they are forgetting that. It's a powerful message to me as someone who loves the Olympics.

In the movie, the speech ends up having the desired affect when his team is reinstated, but even if that weren't the case the argument is sent home very well, and it is well adapted for his audience. These men are in charge of how the Olympics run and he shows them that they are missing the point of it all. Even if they were to not reinstate him, they could not completely fail to respect the message that he sent them.

Music Video

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5olLPmjVV24

I've got to say, I had a pretty hard time finding a good video for this. Maybe it's just because I don't watch too many music videos, but I had a hard time getting what the groups were trying to carry across with their videos. A lot of them I think are just trying to be creative or funny, or even just weird.

But alright, I'll get to it. I finally settled on a music video by Jimmy Eat World. I admit that part of the reason I chose it was because its message was pretty clear. But I also really like the music.

The song is called "work". I had to go through it a couple times to actually get what the message was, even though I already thought I understood it going in. To be honest, going into it I didn't realize that the main theme was largely about sex.

The video starts with some interviews of school kids, all around the age of 17, which is typical of kids who are graduating High School. They're all asked about their plans for the future and college is one of the main topics they bring up. One of the most important comments that I think is made is by the girl who says that parents shouldn't be so controlling because kids need to learn by experience because that's the same way the parents learned when they were young. Then we get to the music. As far as I can tell the lyrics are about a guy persuading his girlfriend to just go with the flow that night and not worry about what might happen. His argument is similar to that of the girl in the interview, that you can't predict the consequences so you should just let things happen and live with it.

To me, the main message throughout the first half of the video and song is that you shouldn't let your worries about what's going to happen stop you from living life. Towards the end it kind of shifts to a more serious message, with the lines that "work and play they're never OK, to mix the way we do". I think that this part is meant to carry across the message that if you have big dreams like going to a good college and getting the job you want then you have to work for it and not let yourself get distracted. The interviews at the end seem to follow this, with kids saying how excited they are to be the best they can.

Song: Johnny Cash "Cocaine Blues"

I think this song at first glance comes across as a glamorization of drugs, and that was partly why I chose it, because he definitely is trying to persuade people of somthing, just definitely not that! He makes it clear in the last line of the song what his purpose is, but people may not listen to the whole thing to hear that, especially because it's not included in his performance in the movie "Walk the Line".

A big part of the rhetoric he uses is definitely ethos. The song isn't a story about some other guy, it's sung from the first person, as if it was him who the story's about. Obviously it isn't really, because Johnny Cash never killed his wife and was never in jail, though he probably did do cocaine. So I think he tells the story in first person to make his audience believe that he knows what he's talking about. He also tell the story in such detail that it seems very credible. The story seems like it could very easily be true.

Logos could be said to be used in the way the story follows a very believable chain of events. The listener needs to be convinced that doing Cocaine can lead to all the craziness that he got himself into, and hence the detail involved in the story.

I'd say pathos is used in the way he makes the song entertaining and lively and fun, so that it doesn't feel like he's preaching to the audience. I'd especially refer to the line "I thought I was her daddy but she had five more". This line kind of makes you laugh, and it also kind of makes you feel bad for the singer because, which is a feeling that I think you're kind of supposed to have throughout the song. Another part that I think utilizes pathos is the last line, where he says "come on you've gotta listen up to me", because it makes you feel like he's talking to you, and, I don't know, in a way makes you not want to let him down or something.

As far as research goes, obviously with a song there's usually not too many works cited, and that's how it is with this song. Although I think with this song the lack of a valid source could be a weakness, because the audience will probably know that Johnny Cash isn't really talking about himself, and they may wonder "What does he know about going to jail?" and such. If the story is actually a true story then it may have been more credible to tell it as the story of whoever experienced it.

I think based on his audience, which was at times people in prison, but also I think his main audience outside of the prisons were people who were of the "rebel" type, because that's the kind of attitude that Johnny Cash displayed, the argument is very effective. They would probably then have accepted him as a leader and would have probably been OK with him giving them advice.

Response to: Paper A

I'd say my paper was focused mainly on pathos and logos, with little help from the ethos side of things, as my rather lame sources showed. I used a lot of my own opinions, but I never really gave any reasons for why people should respect my views, so I didn't really count as an authoritative figure or an expert. Even the sources I used were not so much used for their authoritative role, but for the logic they demonstrate.

In the first paragraph and elsewhere in the paper where I described the feelings of being in love I was making an appeal to pathos. My goal was to get people thinking about times when they've said "I love you" or heard it from someone else, because my paper was aimed towards people who had been in love before. I thought that if people could agree with how I was describing the feelings of saying "I love you" then they would be more willing to believe what I said throughout the rest of the paper.

The rest of the paper relies heavily on logos. The course of logical argument used is: The topic of love is confusing, and people have different ideas of what it means to say "I love you". Because guys and girls are so different, it's no surprise that they have different views. Also, there is the danger that people say it without meaning it. These problems pull away from the fact that the focus should be on the work required to make a relationship work.

The research I used is, I admit, not very sufficient to properly make the claims that I make. I don't use too many sources, and many of the ones I do use are not respectable sources by any means. The points made are, I believe, typical of what many believe, and they are accurately represented.

For some people this paper may have been effective. I'd say definitely for the people who often read opinion articles from relationship magazines and things like that. For those in my audience who are more accustomed to extensive research and more solidly built rhetoric it probably would not be too effective.