I reviewed Missy Webb's essay on its content/form
One major thing that I would recommend Missy change is to explicitly state what her stance on her argument is in her introduction paper. This would help let the reader know what the paper they are reading is about as well as provide focus to the paper. Another thing about the intro is that there are a lot of rhetorical questions. I liked the usage of them but there seems to be a lot. Perhaps removing some of the rhetorical questions so that they aren't so many could be a good idea.
When citing Twitter, I feel as though saying (@ name on Twitter) is not a very good way to go about it. I would recommend just citing it how you normally would with just the Tweeter's (?) last name, because the work cited is what lets people know where the source is coming from. Furthermore, I noticed there really wasn't a lot of sources used causing reliance on the same sources. While this may not necessarily be a bad thing, I don't think you are supposed to constantly cite the same source a bunch of times in a row as you did in your second paragraph with (Smith). The low amount of sources and 3 of them being from twitter also lowers credibility a bit when a reader sees your sources.
I did like how you made us of first person which I felt helped with appealing to pathos.
Sunday, April 24, 2016
Peer Review 13A
Peer review of Jason Boley's essay on its content.
Overall, Jason's essay is well written and he clearly meets the requirements for project 3 as outlined in the rubric. The main thing that I would suggest is to perhaps more explicitly state what you mean by the "compromise" between the various groups that are involved. This would help the reader have a more clear understanding of what exactly the paper is going to be arguing. Also, I would recommend changing the title to something that better states what the paper is about (i.e, the title has no mention of the highway).
I really liked the way that Jason incorporated his sources by having footnotes on each page of which sources he used. I also liked how he included his name and the page number on every page which I need to use in my own essay.
Other than better explaining his paper's argument in the intro, Jason's paper is very well done and researched.
Overall, Jason's essay is well written and he clearly meets the requirements for project 3 as outlined in the rubric. The main thing that I would suggest is to perhaps more explicitly state what you mean by the "compromise" between the various groups that are involved. This would help the reader have a more clear understanding of what exactly the paper is going to be arguing. Also, I would recommend changing the title to something that better states what the paper is about (i.e, the title has no mention of the highway).
I really liked the way that Jason incorporated his sources by having footnotes on each page of which sources he used. I also liked how he included his name and the page number on every page which I need to use in my own essay.
Other than better explaining his paper's argument in the intro, Jason's paper is very well done and researched.
Reflection on Local Revision Process
Well I finished my 3rd Project in the course. Here are some closing thoughts on my experiences in getting my project ready to release!
What were some of the successes (or, things that went right) during this week’s process work? Explain, with evidence.
I felt as though I made strong revisions which not only made my paper's argument stronger, but also made my sentence fluency and grammar more sound.
What were some of the challenges (or, things that went wrong) during this week’s process work? Explain, with evidence.
I had a sort of internal struggle with how many counterarguments I should include in my paper because having too many counterarguments to argue against would cause my paper to be absurdly long.
How do you think next week will go, based on your experiences this week?
Well next week is gathering content for the final project so I feel as though it should be interesting at the least.
How are you feeling about the project overall at this point?
What were some of the successes (or, things that went right) during this week’s process work? Explain, with evidence.
I felt as though I made strong revisions which not only made my paper's argument stronger, but also made my sentence fluency and grammar more sound.
What were some of the challenges (or, things that went wrong) during this week’s process work? Explain, with evidence.
I had a sort of internal struggle with how many counterarguments I should include in my paper because having too many counterarguments to argue against would cause my paper to be absurdly long.
How do you think next week will go, based on your experiences this week?
Well next week is gathering content for the final project so I feel as though it should be interesting at the least.
How are you feeling about the project overall at this point?
I feel good about my project, I feel as though I made a strong argument and wrote my argument in an essay form well.
Editorial Report 13B
Rough Cut:
With this paper, I hope that people hold Trump in a better light. Trump is not the second coming
of Hitler, racist, misogynist, or a homophobe. He holds strong opinions against illegal immigration
which is important to make sure that American citizens are who come first. America shouldn’t have
to cater to illegal immigrants in which a noticeable amount are prone to committing crimes. To be a
strong nation, there must be borders. Donald Trump is the man to make America safe and prosper.
With this paper, I hope that people hold Trump in a better light. Trump is not the second coming
of Hitler, racist, misogynist, or a homophobe. He holds strong opinions against illegal immigration
which is important to make sure that American citizens are who come first. America shouldn’t have
to cater to illegal immigrants in which a noticeable amount are prone to committing crimes. To be a
strong nation, there must be borders. Donald Trump is the man to make America safe and prosper.
Revised:
With this paper, I hope that people hold Trump in a better light. Trump is not the second
coming of Hitler, racist, misogynist, or homophobic. He holds strong stances against illegal immigration which is important to make sure that American citizens are who come first. America shouldn’t have to cater to and care for illegal immigrants of which a noticeable amount are prone to committing crimes. This is not to say that nobody should be allowed to enter the United States. Anybody can come in as long as they come in legally. To be a strong nation, there must be borders. Donald Trump is the man who will make America safe and great again.
Questions
How did the content change (even slightly - details matter!) when you re-edited it? Why do you think the content is being communicated more effectively in the re-edited version?
This is my conclusion, and I edited some sentences so that the grammar works better and the sentences flow more. I also added an additional couple sentences which helped summarize my paper's argument a little more.
How did the form change (even slightly - details matter!) when you re-edited it? Why do you think the form is presenting the content more effectively in the re-edited version?
The form didn't really change much besides being slightly longer.
Editorial Report 13A
Rough Cut:
The Presidential election season is in full swing here in the United States. An important aspect of America’s democratic society, the results from the elections can influence the entire country for years to come. Among the frontrunning candidates to the presidential office is one standout: Donald J. Trump. Trump is a polarizing figure to many people, and tends to draw a lot of emotionally charged criticism and hatred. Many consider Trump to be a bigot, a misogynist, and a homophobe, you name it. This in part due to the treatment Trump gets from the mainstream media, who have seemed to have an agenda against Trump in order to paint him in a negative light thus far in the election season. However, this paper will dispel the common accusations against Trump and talk about why Trump would make a good president by specifically looking at his stances on illegal immigration.
Revised:
About the author: Ryan Wolfe is an Asian-American attending the University of Arizona as a member of the Honors College and is majoring in Electrical and Computer Engineering. Ryan has been involved with politics at the local and state level in Arizona since 2014.
The Presidential election season is in full swing here in the United States. An important aspect of America’s democratic society, the results from the elections can influence the entire country for years to come. Among the frontrunning candidates to the presidency is one standout: Donald J. Trump. Trump is a polarizing figure to many people, and tends to draw a lot of emotionally charged criticism and hatred. Many consider Trump to be a bigot, a misogynist, and a homophobe, you name it. This image is in part due to the treatment Trump gets from the mainstream media, who have seemed to have an agenda against Trump in order to paint him in a negative light thus far in the election season. However, this paper will dispel the common accusations against Trump’s character and then talk about why Trump would make a good president by specifically looking at his stances on illegal immigration.
Questions
How did the content change (even slightly - details matter!) when you re-edited it? Why do you think the content is being communicated more effectively in the re-edited version?
In the main introduction paragraph I slightly edited my thesis so that the focus of my paper is more clear to my audience. I also added a segment at the beginning of my paper which gives information about myself as the author. I felt like this established some credibility and give some insight to the reader about who's words they are reading.
How did the form change (even slightly - details matter!) when you re-edited it? Why do you think the form is presenting the content more effectively in the re-edited version?
The form changed in that there is an additional blurb at the beginning of my essay. I feel as though this makes my essay have more character to it as it establishes information about the author and looks like how you would see an essay in an academic journal.
Revised Post to Peer Reviewers
Well I finished my essay so I am feeling pretty good about myself. I have already turned in my essay on D2L but if there is any additional criticism I guess can always resubmit.
Key information about your particular project that you would like anyone who peer reviews your draft to know
The main thing about my project is that it is defending and supporting Donald Trump who I know a lot of people have strong negative reactions to. Just be sure to go into my essay with an open mind.
Major issues or weaknesses in the “Fine Cut” that you’re already aware of (as well as anything you’d like to know from your editors about those weaknesses)
The one weakness in my paper I feel is that I didn't provide all of the counterarguments that could be argued against my paper. I just didn't want to make a stupidly long essay to cover all of the bases for a highly intricate and controversial argument.
Major virtues or strengths in the “Fine Cut” that you’re already aware of (as well as anything you’d like to know from your editors about those strengths)
Key information about your particular project that you would like anyone who peer reviews your draft to know
The main thing about my project is that it is defending and supporting Donald Trump who I know a lot of people have strong negative reactions to. Just be sure to go into my essay with an open mind.
Major issues or weaknesses in the “Fine Cut” that you’re already aware of (as well as anything you’d like to know from your editors about those weaknesses)
The one weakness in my paper I feel is that I didn't provide all of the counterarguments that could be argued against my paper. I just didn't want to make a stupidly long essay to cover all of the bases for a highly intricate and controversial argument.
Major virtues or strengths in the “Fine Cut” that you’re already aware of (as well as anything you’d like to know from your editors about those strengths)
I feel as though I did a good job of using a lot of sources and putting them to use in my paper. I felt as though this helped with my credibility as well as appealing to logos through facts.
Sunday, April 17, 2016
Peer Review Post Production Phase 1 B
For my second peer review I reviewed Malik Bullock's video essay script on the minimum wage controversy.
I reviewed his script on its content.
LINK to my review
I reviewed his script on its content.
LINK to my review
Peer Review Post-Production Phase 1 A
Review of Sofia Haserot's video essay script about Obamacare.
I reviewed her essay script on its content.
LINK to my review
I reviewed her essay script on its content.
LINK to my review
Reflection on Post Production Phase 1 (Project 3)
What were some of the successes (or, things that went right) during this week’s process work? Explain, with evidence.
I feel as though my essay turned out very solid. It is a good length (over 5 pages), and I feel as though my thoughts were articulated well and my argument was strong.
What were some of the challenges (or, things that went wrong) during this week’s process work? Explain, with evidence.
To be honest I didn't have any challenges this week. I feel strongly about what I am arguing about so it was easy to write about.
How do you think next week will go, based on your experiences this week?
Next week should be fairly simple and stress free because all I really have to do is fine tune my essay.
How are you feeling about the project overall at this point?
I feel as though my essay turned out very solid. It is a good length (over 5 pages), and I feel as though my thoughts were articulated well and my argument was strong.
What were some of the challenges (or, things that went wrong) during this week’s process work? Explain, with evidence.
To be honest I didn't have any challenges this week. I feel strongly about what I am arguing about so it was easy to write about.
How do you think next week will go, based on your experiences this week?
Next week should be fairly simple and stress free because all I really have to do is fine tune my essay.
How are you feeling about the project overall at this point?
A+
Open Post to Peer Reviewers Project 3
Link to Rough Cut
Hello potential peer reviewers. I would like to preface with the fact that I wrote a pro-Trump argument, so I would like you to go into my paper with an open mind. I feel as though a weakness in my paper was that I did not address all potential counter arguments to my argument. So if you know of any counter arguments to what I discussed I would appreciate it if you would detail them.
Editorial Report Project 3 B
For this editorial report I will be comparing my conclusion from my rough cut to my edited version.
Rough Cut
With this paper, I hope that people hold Trump in a better light. Trump is not the second coming of Hitler, racist, misogynist, or a homophobe. He holds strong opinions against illegal immigration which is important to make sure that American citizens are who come first. America shouldn’t have to cater to illegal immigrants in which a noticeable amount are prone to committing crimes. To be a strong nation, there must be borders. Donald Trump is the man to make America safe and prosper.
Rough Cut
With this paper, I hope that people hold Trump in a better light. Trump is not the second coming of Hitler, racist, misogynist, or a homophobe. He holds strong opinions against illegal immigration which is important to make sure that American citizens are who come first. America shouldn’t have to cater to illegal immigrants in which a noticeable amount are prone to committing crimes. To be a strong nation, there must be borders. Donald Trump is the man to make America safe and prosper.
Edited version.
The goal of this paper was for people to hold Trump in a better light and even consider him as one of the top presidential candidates. Trump is not the second coming of Hitler, racist, misogynist, or a homophobe. He holds strong opinions against illegal immigration which is important to make sure that American citizens are who come first. America shouldn’t have to cater to illegal immigrants in which a noticeable amount are prone to committing crimes. To be a strong nation, there must be borders. Donald Trump is the man to make America safe and "great again."
Questions
How did the content change (even slightly - details matter!) when you re-edited it? Why do you think the content is being communicated more effectively in the re-edited version?
For my conclusion I changed the first sentence. I feel as though my new sentence is more professional and I didn't like how I used "I" in my original cut. Furthermore, I changed the end sentence so that it included a variation of Trump's campaign motto "Make America great again."
How did the form change (even slightly - details matter!) when you re-edited it? Why do you think the form is presenting the content more effectively in the re-edited version?
Because I am doing a college essay, there really weren't any form changes.
Editorial Report Project 3 A
For this editorial report I will be comparing my intro from my rough cut to my edited version.
Rough Cut
It is a leap year, and as such, America is preparing for the 2016 presidential elections. Presidential elections are an important aspect to America’s democratic society, and the results from them can influence the entire country for years to come. Among the frontrunning candidates to the presidential office is one standout: Donald J. Trump. Trump is a polarizing figure to many people, and tends to draw a lot of emotionally charged criticism and hatred. Many consider Trump to be a bigot, a misogynist, and a homophobe, you name it. This in part due to the treatment Trump gets from the mainstream media, who have seemed to have an agenda against Trump in order to paint him in a negative light thus far in the election season. However, this paper will dispel the common accusations against Trump and talk about why Trump would make a good president by specifically looking at his stances on immigration and national security.
Rough Cut
It is a leap year, and as such, America is preparing for the 2016 presidential elections. Presidential elections are an important aspect to America’s democratic society, and the results from them can influence the entire country for years to come. Among the frontrunning candidates to the presidential office is one standout: Donald J. Trump. Trump is a polarizing figure to many people, and tends to draw a lot of emotionally charged criticism and hatred. Many consider Trump to be a bigot, a misogynist, and a homophobe, you name it. This in part due to the treatment Trump gets from the mainstream media, who have seemed to have an agenda against Trump in order to paint him in a negative light thus far in the election season. However, this paper will dispel the common accusations against Trump and talk about why Trump would make a good president by specifically looking at his stances on immigration and national security.
Edited version.
The Presidential election season is upon the United States, an important aspect to America’s democratic society, and the results from them can influence the entire country for years to come. Among the frontrunning candidates to the presidential office is one standout: Donald J. Trump. Trump is a polarizing figure to many people, and tends to draw a lot of emotionally charged criticism and hatred. Many consider Trump to be a bigot, a misogynist, and a homophobe, you name it. This in part due to the treatment Trump gets from the mainstream media, who have seemed to have an agenda against Trump in order to paint him in a negative light thus far in the election season. However, this paper will dispel the common accusations against Trump and talk about why Trump would make a good president by specifically looking at his stances on illegal immigration
Questions
How did the content change (even slightly - details matter!) when you re-edited it? Why do you think the content is being communicated more effectively in the re-edited version?
Well this is the intro, and I made changes regarding my attention grabber and thesis. I feel as though my new intro flows much better, and I ended up cutting out a section of my thesis in order to make my essay more focused.
How did the form change (even slightly - details matter!) when you re-edited it? Why do you think the form is presenting the content more effectively in the re-edited version?
Because I am doing a college essay, there really weren't any form changes.
Sunday, April 10, 2016
Project 3 Production Peer Review B
For my second peer review I peer reviewed Jake Gyles' production report for his introduction paragraph about school lunches versus homemade lunches. I decided to review his paragraph on its form/content.
To be honest, I found Jake's intro paragraph to be a little strange. The opening lines are an anecdotal story with heavy use of first person narrative. I personally believe this goes against the traditional genre conventions for a standard college essays, as standard essays are generally more professional and no nonsense. However, while I personally am not sure if the intro is correct in terms of professionalism, I do like the creativity. The opening story was able to capture my attention although it was a little tacky. Furthermore, I disliked how Jake stated that it was his mother's lunches that led him to become "far too heavy for [his] own good." I feel as though this is a broad generalization in terms of what actually goes into making a person unhealthy, and seemed to force the essay's argument down my throat. I would recommend perhaps easing up on the bluntness of the message of the opening story so that it isn't simply, "I'm overweight because my mom packed me lunch for school." Anyways, I do like the premise of the essay, the argument is very specific and unique.
To sum up my review, I would recommend considering the genre conventions for a college essay in terms of professionalism, and then perhaps edit the opening anecdote so that its message isn't so heavy-handed/forced.
To be honest, I found Jake's intro paragraph to be a little strange. The opening lines are an anecdotal story with heavy use of first person narrative. I personally believe this goes against the traditional genre conventions for a standard college essays, as standard essays are generally more professional and no nonsense. However, while I personally am not sure if the intro is correct in terms of professionalism, I do like the creativity. The opening story was able to capture my attention although it was a little tacky. Furthermore, I disliked how Jake stated that it was his mother's lunches that led him to become "far too heavy for [his] own good." I feel as though this is a broad generalization in terms of what actually goes into making a person unhealthy, and seemed to force the essay's argument down my throat. I would recommend perhaps easing up on the bluntness of the message of the opening story so that it isn't simply, "I'm overweight because my mom packed me lunch for school." Anyways, I do like the premise of the essay, the argument is very specific and unique.
To sum up my review, I would recommend considering the genre conventions for a college essay in terms of professionalism, and then perhaps edit the opening anecdote so that its message isn't so heavy-handed/forced.
Project 3 Production Peer Review A
I reviewed Brady Thomas' production report for his first body paragraph about how America is handling the issue of cyber security. I reviewed the introduction on its form.
The suggestions I made may not be necessary depending on how Brady assembles his video, but I feel as though it is important to consider video length when creating the project. As is the case for any of the genres really, people have short attention spans.
The overall script for this body paragraph is very solid. There are a lot of good ideas being thrown around and there has clearly been a good amount of research. In terms of the form, I feel as though the paragraph is possibly a little wordy because Brady's genre is a video essay. Based on my experiences with making a podcast, having a lengthy script can lead to rather long run times for the final project. This may not be an issue depending on how it is edited, but if video clips are gonna be added to the video essay, having long audio clips can make the project run long. I would recommend trimming down the script if necessary. Like Brady said when answering the questions, he chose diction that was more colloquial which I feel is good for a video essay. Having a more friendly tone can lead to better audience immersion and interest.
For a recommendation when making the video essay itself, I would recommend including clips of the politicians that were mentioned either as their own clips with audio or just in the background while a voice over plays. It would keep the audience immersed and understanding what is being discussed.
The suggestions I made may not be necessary depending on how Brady assembles his video, but I feel as though it is important to consider video length when creating the project. As is the case for any of the genres really, people have short attention spans.
Reflection on Production Project 3
What were some of the successes (or, things that went right) during this week’s process work? Explain, with evidence.
What went right is that I found that having a large number of sources has made it easier to write my argument. I found it reassuring to be able to back up my statements and claims with credible sources.
What were some of the challenges (or, things that went wrong) during this week’s process work? Explain, with evidence.
What has gone wrong during this week is that I found it somewhat difficult to articulate all of my thoughts into cohesive paragraphs. There is a lot to talk about, and keeping it organized in an essay format was challenging.
How do you think next week will go, based on your experiences this week?
Next week should go smoothly because I have already generated all of my content, and I just need to go back over and revise.
How are you feeling about the project overall at this point?
I am feeling fairly strong so far, I do have concerns about whether or not my argument is specific and if so, if it is strong enough.
Production Report Project 3B
Outline Item
IV. Body 3
- Topic Sentence
Now that the myths have been dispelled, let’s talk about one of the main driving forces as to why Trump would make a good president: he will put America first.
- Evidence/Analysis
Trump wants to bring jobs back into America, and over the years has created thousands of jobs for American workers through his many business ventures.
Trump has raised millions of dollars for veteran organizations.
Trump is interested in protecting national security and is a champion for veterans.
Outline Item Adaption
Before Trump’s immigration policies get discussed, it is important to clear up the common misconceptions about him so that people can react to his positions without negative bias. One of the main accusations against Trump is that he is a racist. This notion about him is in part due to his stances on immigration which will be fleshed out later in this paper. However, it is worth noting that nobody has claimed Donald Trump as a racist during his decades of work in the business world. So while the racism claims will be disputed later, the misconception that Trump is a misogynist or a homophobe will be disputed now. According to many of the women Trump has worked with, Trump was “a corporate executive ahead of his time in providing career advancement for women.” Louise Sunshine, a women who worked with Trump for 15 years stated that “From the standpoint of being a woman, I just thought [Trump] was phenomenal” (Sellers 7). Furthermore, “Trump employs more women than men at the upper echelons of his real estate empire, and in many cases pays them more” (Ross 1). So not only is there anecdotal evidence from the women who have worked with Trump about his respect for women, there is also analytical evidence in terms of the financing of his businesses. Now about Trump’s beliefs regarding the LGBT community, a LGBT reporter for msnbc has said that “the real estate mogul and reality TV host might [...] be the most LGBT-friendly Republican running for president” (Margolin 1). And on the topic of same-sex marriage, Trump has been on record stating that same-sex marriage is a “dead-issue” because the Supreme Court has ruled on the matter (Browning 2). The bottom line is that while Trump may have a personal stance against same-sex marriage, he has repeatedly said that his personal views will not affect the issue as the Supreme Court has already ruled on it and his ultimate goal is “bring people together” (Reynolds 1).
How did you decide to use form to present your content in the raw material you’ve shared here? How did the conventions of your chosen genre influence your choices?
Like I said in the previous production report, there was not many decisions that needed to be made because my genre is a standard essay,
How did the production of this raw material go? What kinds of any hiccups, challenges, successes, creative epiphanies, etc. occurred during the process?
One thing that I have had an issue with thus far is articulating all my thoughts in a cohesive manner. I feel as though the standard essay genre is somewhat restricting in me being able to fully flesh out my thoughts on my argument in an understandable manner.
Production Report Project 3A
Once again it is time for production. This time was more traditional in that I am writing a standard college essay. In this post I will show segments from my content outline and then show the content I produced for said segment.
Outline Item
- iIntroduction
- Attention Grabber
Introduce the importance of the topic by talking about how the presidential elections can influence the country for years to come. Also talk about how the mainstream media has had an agenda against Donald Trump.
B. Background
- Going off of the attention grabber, explain in more detail how Trump is wrongly treated by the media.
- Acknowledge the polarizing nature of Trump, and ask the reader to hear out what my argument is about because it could be eye-opening.
C. Thesis
Donald Trump is a legitimate presidential candidate that everyone should at least consider, in this paper I will dispel the myths that Trump is racist, misogynist, and homophobic by exploring his stances on immigration as well as actions he has made in the past.
Adaption of Outline Item
It is a leap year, and as such, America is preparing for the 2016 presidential elections. Presidential elections are an important aspect to America’s democratic society, and the results from them can influence the entire country for years to come. Among the frontrunning candidates to the presidential office is one standout: Donald J. Trump. Trump is a polarizing figure to many people, and tends to draw a lot of emotionally charged criticism and hatred. Many consider Trump to be a bigot, a misogynist, and a homophobe, you name it. This in part due to the treatment Trump gets from the mainstream media, who have seemed to have an agenda against Trump in order to paint him in a negative light thus far in the election season. However, this paper will dispel the common accusations against Trump and talk about why Trump would make a good president by specifically looking at his stances on immigration and national security.
- How did you decide to use form to present your content in the raw material you’ve shared here? How did the conventions of your chosen genre influence your choices?
Like I said at the beginning of this blog post, I am writing in a standard college essay for this project, so there wasn't really much to think about in terms of form and genre conventions besides making my content professional.
- How did the production of this raw material go? What kinds of any hiccups, challenges, successes, creative epiphanies, etc. occurred during the process?
There wasn't really any major issues with production. The thing about my intro was making sure that my thesis was concise and specific enough in order to write a well-focused essay about it.
Sunday, April 3, 2016
Project 3 Peer Review B
For the second peer review, I decided to review Avalon Lubera's content outline which is about drug decriminalization to help the prison population problem.
The content outline is overall good, Avalon provides evidence and analysis for each body paragraph at an adequate level and provides concise sentences that get the point across. I also liked that Avalon had a paragraph dedicated to rebutting the other side to her argument. Avalon has a clear grasp on the requirements for project 3, and has chosen a clear, specific, and controversial topic to argue about.
One of the main issues with the outline is that their are not specific sources cited. Providing the sources in the outline can help with organization and fluidity when creating the actual content of the project. Besides that, it would probably be helpful to provide more analysis of the evidence that is provided. For instance, the majority of the time there is only one small quip in response to the evidence that is given, which is not nearly enough. However, it is only an outline that is just supposed to get the basic ideas down.
Besides that, the outline is well made and would certainly be helpful for Avalon when she begins to create her project.
The content outline is overall good, Avalon provides evidence and analysis for each body paragraph at an adequate level and provides concise sentences that get the point across. I also liked that Avalon had a paragraph dedicated to rebutting the other side to her argument. Avalon has a clear grasp on the requirements for project 3, and has chosen a clear, specific, and controversial topic to argue about.
One of the main issues with the outline is that their are not specific sources cited. Providing the sources in the outline can help with organization and fluidity when creating the actual content of the project. Besides that, it would probably be helpful to provide more analysis of the evidence that is provided. For instance, the majority of the time there is only one small quip in response to the evidence that is given, which is not nearly enough. However, it is only an outline that is just supposed to get the basic ideas down.
Besides that, the outline is well made and would certainly be helpful for Avalon when she begins to create her project.
Project 3 Peer Review A
For this peer review I reviewed Rashaan Malik's rhetorical analysis which is about his rhetorical situation for his topic of the 2020 FIFA World Cup controversies.
Overall, Rashaan's rhetorical analysis is well done, and provides a lot of detail in answering the questions that someone might have about his project. He does a good job of explaining information about him, his purpose, audience, and context through clear sentences that directly answer the questions that a reader may have.
Rashaan understands the goal of project 3, but I feel like he wants to be as nice as possible when he doesn't have to be. For instance, for his purpose, Rashaan says he wants "the audience to consider the malevolent nature of corporations..." I believe for the sake of an argument, his goal should be to have his audience understand and accept the things he wanted them to consider, as that should be the goal of an argument, to get people on your side.
Another concern I have is that while Rashaan is arguing about a controversial topic, I feel as though the majority of his audience would already be in favor of the positions he is going to argue for, which defeats the purpose. I may however be wrong about the general opinion of his topic, but I would recommend that he argues for something that is polarizing in itself.
I liked that Rashaan knows he must consider qualifying arguments and take other perspectives into account which I did not think that much about during my pre-production phase. For my revision, I identified specific problems and provided suggestions.
Overall, Rashaan's rhetorical analysis is well done, and provides a lot of detail in answering the questions that someone might have about his project. He does a good job of explaining information about him, his purpose, audience, and context through clear sentences that directly answer the questions that a reader may have.
Rashaan understands the goal of project 3, but I feel like he wants to be as nice as possible when he doesn't have to be. For instance, for his purpose, Rashaan says he wants "the audience to consider the malevolent nature of corporations..." I believe for the sake of an argument, his goal should be to have his audience understand and accept the things he wanted them to consider, as that should be the goal of an argument, to get people on your side.
Another concern I have is that while Rashaan is arguing about a controversial topic, I feel as though the majority of his audience would already be in favor of the positions he is going to argue for, which defeats the purpose. I may however be wrong about the general opinion of his topic, but I would recommend that he argues for something that is polarizing in itself.
I liked that Rashaan knows he must consider qualifying arguments and take other perspectives into account which I did not think that much about during my pre-production phase. For my revision, I identified specific problems and provided suggestions.
Project 3 Reflection on Pre-Production
What were some of the successes (or, things that went right) during this week’s process work? Explain, with evidence.
What went right was that I was able to gather a good amount of sources that will be really helpful during the production week. Furthermore, I was able to find a topic that I actually have an interest in and I can talk about it with passion.
What were some of the challenges (or, things that went wrong) during this week’s process work? Explain, with evidence.
One of the challenges was that there was a lot of busy work to sludge through (listing sources/rhetorical analysis) that I felt took up way too much time for how helpful they actually are.
How do you think next week will go, based on your experiences this week?
Next week should go well as I am writing an essay, which I have a lot of experience in, and I have a lot of the information I will need.
How are you feeling about the project overall at this point?
What went right was that I was able to gather a good amount of sources that will be really helpful during the production week. Furthermore, I was able to find a topic that I actually have an interest in and I can talk about it with passion.
What were some of the challenges (or, things that went wrong) during this week’s process work? Explain, with evidence.
One of the challenges was that there was a lot of busy work to sludge through (listing sources/rhetorical analysis) that I felt took up way too much time for how helpful they actually are.
How do you think next week will go, based on your experiences this week?
Next week should go well as I am writing an essay, which I have a lot of experience in, and I have a lot of the information I will need.
How are you feeling about the project overall at this point?
I am feeling strong about the project, I just have some concern over whether or not my topic is specific enough, but the project prompt doesn't really clarify how specific it needs to be.
Production Schedule Project 3
With the production week coming up for Project 3 coming up, it would be helpful to make a schedule for what needs to be done over the week.
Monday April 4th
Begin Rough Draft, finish introduction paragraph.
Wednesday April 6th
Finish Body Paragraph 1
Thursday April 7th
Continue with draft, finish 2nd body paragraph.
Friday April 8th
Continue with draft, finish 3rd body paragraph.
Saturday April 9th
Finish draft.
Sunday April 10th
Revise and Edit draft #1
Wednesday April 13th
Revise and Edit draft #2
Saturday April 16th
Go over and finalize essay
The locations for these dates will be at the University of Arizona on my laptop. The only things I will need are my laptop and an internet connection.
Monday April 4th
Begin Rough Draft, finish introduction paragraph.
Wednesday April 6th
Finish Body Paragraph 1
Thursday April 7th
Continue with draft, finish 2nd body paragraph.
Friday April 8th
Continue with draft, finish 3rd body paragraph.
Saturday April 9th
Finish draft.
Sunday April 10th
Revise and Edit draft #1
Wednesday April 13th
Revise and Edit draft #2
Saturday April 16th
Go over and finalize essay
The locations for these dates will be at the University of Arizona on my laptop. The only things I will need are my laptop and an internet connection.
Content Outline Project 3
This is my project outline for Project 3. The genre I am doing is a standard college essay.
LINK to outline
LINK to outline
Research Report
After gathering sources for Project 3, it is time to share my sources and provide insight on their rhetorical situations.
Source 1
"Donald Trump, a champion of women? His female employees think so."
by Frances Stead Sellers
via The Washington Post
About the author: Frances Sellers is a senior writer at the Washington Post, and has previously won a National Magazine award for launching a bi-monthly magazine for the Library of Congress. Sellers primary job at the moment is covering the 2016 election for the Post, which givers her credibility in regards to her coverage of the elections.
Target Audience: The intended audience for this article would be people who believe that Trump is a misogynist and an enemy of women. This can be seen from the title, which clearly debunks the theory that Trump is a misogynist by saying that women who know him think he is great. Furthermore, the entire are article are anecdotes form former female employees of Trump who hold him in high regard.
Purpose: The main purpose for this article is to illustrate the opinions that former female employees have for Trump. This can be seen from the title, which is an overall synopsis of the article's contents, as well as in the article itself, which is filled with positive anecdotal evidence about Trump concerning women.
Context: This source is reliable because it comes from The Washington Post, which is the most widely circulated paper in the Washington D.C. area and is nationally known. Furthermore, the credentials of the author tell me that this article is most likely reliable.
2
"Poll: Trump, Clinton score historic unfavorable ratings"
by David Wright
via CNN
About the author: David Wright is a writer for CNN who is covering the 2016 election as a breaking news reporter. Wright has a degree in politics and has worked for CNN in their Washington D.C. Bureau.
Target Audience: The intended audience for this article would be people who dislike Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton and are more in favor of Bernie Sanders. This can be seen from the title of the piece which implies that the article is negative towards Trump and Clinton. Furthermore, the article is full of negative information about Trump and Clinton while saying that Bernie Sanders is a much more favorable candidate.
Purpose: The main purpose for this article is to illustrate and amplify negativity towards Trump and Clinton. This can be seen from the way David Wright worded his presentation of the information, "That makes Trump and Clinton viewed more unfavorably than any front-runner for either party since 1984." Furthermore, the author seems to be in favor of Sanders as he talks about how Sanders would do better against Trump than Clinton, even though Sanders isn't even ahead of Clinton.
Context: This source is reliable because it comes from CNN, a nationally acknowledged news source. Furthermore, the article uses polling data from CBS/New York Times, two other well known news outlets.
3
"Trump: Same-Sex Marriage Is a Dead Issue"
by Bil Browning
via The Advocate
About the author: Bil Browning is a writer for the Advocate. Browning is a champion for LGBT writes, so the fact that he has a positive article about Trump is eye-opening as Trump is seen as anti-LGBT by a lot of people.
Target Audience: The intended audience for this article would be people who believe Donald Trump is anti-LGBT as well as people who are in favor of LGBT rights. This is because Trump is generally seen as anti-LGBT, and this article disproves that. Furthermore, The Advocate is a LGBT-interest magazine, so most of its articles are about LGBT rights.
Purpose: The main purpose for this article is to show that Trump is not as anti-LGBT as a lot of people make him out to me, and he does not believe gay-marriage is an issue. Additionally, the article seems to want to show that Trump is the best Republican candidate from when Browning states, "Other presidential candidates in the crowded Republican field have called for a constitutional amendment to overturn the June Supreme Court ruling that legalized same-sex marriage in the United States."
Context: This source is reliable because it comes from The Advocate, which is a magazine dedicated to LGBT news, and the article is about Trump's stance on an LGBT issue. Furthermore, the article is simply reporting a quote that Trump said from an interview, so their is raw information that can't be misconstrued.
4
"Illegal Alien Crime Wave in Texas: 611,234 Crimes, 2,993 Murders"
by J. Christian Adams
via PJ Media
About the author: Adams is an election lawyer who has worked in the U.S. Department of Justice. Adams also has written a New York Times Bestselling book.
Target Audience: The intended audience for this article would be people who lean on the right side of the U.S. political spectrum, (conservatives, libertarians), This can be seen because the article is anti illegal immigration/illegal aliens, as the article is a hit piece illustrating the problems that illegal immigrants have caused. Furthermore, PJ Media is a conservative based news outlet.
Purpose: The main purpose for this article is to show that the damages that illegal immigrants have caused, and thus is advocating for border control/illegal immigration control. The title itself illustrates the article's negative views on illegal immigration as the title itself refers to illegal immigrants as "aliens," a politically incorrect slur.
Context: This source is reliable because it comes from a well known news site (PJ Media). Furthermore, the article is filled with links to its sources which provides credibility in terms of its information.
5
"Hungarian Border Fence So Effective Illegal Immigrants Are Now At Pre Migrant-Crisis Levels"
by Oliver JJ Lane
via Breitbart
About the author: Oliver Lane is a writer for Breitbart London and reports on national defense, security, and radical Islam.
Target Audience: The intended audience for this article would be people who lean conservative or people who are in favor of or unsure of building a wall on a country's border. This is because Breitbart is a conservative news outlet, and the article is providing news on the effects of a border fence at stopping illegal immigration.
Purpose: The main purpose for this article is to show that the building a border fence/wall is an effective way to deter illegal immigrants. The article provides facts showing how Illegal Immigration has gotten better for Hungary after they put up a border fence. A good quote from the article that illustrates its overall purpose is: "strong borders and a strong defence were key to a nation’s prosperity."
Context: This source is reliable because it comes from a credible news site (Breitbart.com) and provides links to its sources for the information that it is providing.
6
"Trump denounces David Duke, KKK"
by Eugene Scott
via CNN
About the author: Eugene Scott is a reporter for CNN Politics and is covering the 2016 elections for them. Scott is also "a multiple award-winning journalist, recognized by the National Association of Black Journalists, the Society of Professional Journalists and Gannett Awards of Excellence, for his work related to politics, education and urban policy issues."
Target Audience: The intended audience for this article would be people interested in the 2016 presidential candidates, particularly those interested in Donald Trump. The article is dedicated to Trump information, and gives information on the overall election landscape on the Republican side.
Purpose: The main purpose for this article is to show that Donald Trump has disavowed David Duke, which was a concern for many when he would previously not comment on the matter. The title of the article clearly shows what the article is going to be about. Furthermore, the article seems to sympathize with Trump by giving a quote from Trump: "I'm not being treated the right way. I'm not being treated properly."
Context: This source is reliable because it comes from CNN, and provides video proof of what is being talked about.
7
"Is Donald Trump 2016’s most LGBT-friendly Republican?"
by Emma Margolin
via MSNBC
About the author: Emma Margolin is a reporter for MSNBC, and her primary areas of expertise are in LGBT, equality, and society. Her work has been published in the Princeton Journal of Bioethics.
Target Audience: The intended audience for this article would be liberals/independents as well as people interested in LGBT rights. MSNBC is a liberal leaning news outlet, and the article is about which Republican candidate is the most LGBT friendly.
Purpose: The main purpose for this article is to talk about the Republican presidential candidates in terms of their views on the LGBT community. The article does focus on Trump, as he is seen as the most LGBT-friendly Republican candidate. The article isn't fully pro-Trump, but it clearly supports Trump more than the other candidates. "Yet none of those candidates could ever be described as “pro-LGBT” – certainly not, at least, more so than Trump."
Context: This source is reliable because it comes from MSNBC which is a nationally accredited news outlet. Furthermore, the article comes out with quotes and facts and gives its own sources as well.
8
"Attorney: Trump Companies Employ More Female Execs Than Male"
by Chuck Ross
via MSNBC
About the author: Chuck Ross is a reporter at The Daily Caller and has published numerous articles about political topics.
Target Audience: The intended audience for this article would be conservatives as well as Trump supporters/haters. The Daily Caller is a conservative news outlet, and the article is centered around Trump, whom is very controversial and has a good amount of people who dislike and like him.
Purpose: The main purpose for this article is to disprove the idea that Trump is a misogynist by providing facts demonstrating how he is more than fair towards women (at least in the work force). The article is about Trump's fairness to his women employees, "Trump has maintained that he “cherishes” women and that he has long been progressive on the issue of employing women at the top levels of his companies."
Context: This source is reliable because it comes from a reliable and accredited news outlet in The Daily Caller. Furthermore, the article provides sources and facts to prove that what it is talking about is truthful.
9
"Donal Trump: Positions"
by Donald Trump
via DonaldJTrump.com
About the author: This source comes from Donald Trump's website, so it was directly written by him or one of his campaign workers.
Target Audience: The intended audience for this article would be people interested in Trump's political positions, and since he is running on the Republican ballot, Republicans/Independents would be his primary target. I feel as though this source is also targeting Trump haters, as a good majority of them do not actually know Trump's policy positions.
Purpose: The main purpose for this source is to clearly illustrate Trump's positions on several issues. The source simply states a number of issues, then provides Trump's positions on them. There really isn't much to it, all presidential candidates have a page like this on their websites, and they are intended to inform the public on where they stand.
Context: This source is reliable because it comes straight from the Donald himself. Since it is the official page of his campaign, it can be assumed that the information is credible.
10
"Donald Trump's proposed ban on Muslim immigrants could be legal, scholars say"
by David Savage
via The LA Times
About the author: "David G. Savage has covered the Supreme Court and legal issues for the Los Angeles Times in the Washington bureau since 1986." He has also been writing for the LA Times since 1981.
Target Audience: The intended audience for this article would be people interested about Trump's comments regarding stopping Muslims from entering the United States. The article discusses the legality of the issue and provides commentary on the morality of the issue as well.
Purpose: The main purpose for this source is to talk about the legality and morality of Trump's plan to ban Muslims from entering the United States for a period of time. The article talks about what scholars have concluded about the plan, and also provides insight on what people think about the plan.
Context: This source is reliable because it comes from a major newspaper in the LA Times. Furthermore, the article provides its sources and comes from an esteemed author/reporter.
Source 1
"Donald Trump, a champion of women? His female employees think so."
by Frances Stead Sellers
via The Washington Post
About the author: Frances Sellers is a senior writer at the Washington Post, and has previously won a National Magazine award for launching a bi-monthly magazine for the Library of Congress. Sellers primary job at the moment is covering the 2016 election for the Post, which givers her credibility in regards to her coverage of the elections.
Target Audience: The intended audience for this article would be people who believe that Trump is a misogynist and an enemy of women. This can be seen from the title, which clearly debunks the theory that Trump is a misogynist by saying that women who know him think he is great. Furthermore, the entire are article are anecdotes form former female employees of Trump who hold him in high regard.
Purpose: The main purpose for this article is to illustrate the opinions that former female employees have for Trump. This can be seen from the title, which is an overall synopsis of the article's contents, as well as in the article itself, which is filled with positive anecdotal evidence about Trump concerning women.
Context: This source is reliable because it comes from The Washington Post, which is the most widely circulated paper in the Washington D.C. area and is nationally known. Furthermore, the credentials of the author tell me that this article is most likely reliable.
2
"Poll: Trump, Clinton score historic unfavorable ratings"
by David Wright
via CNN
About the author: David Wright is a writer for CNN who is covering the 2016 election as a breaking news reporter. Wright has a degree in politics and has worked for CNN in their Washington D.C. Bureau.
Target Audience: The intended audience for this article would be people who dislike Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton and are more in favor of Bernie Sanders. This can be seen from the title of the piece which implies that the article is negative towards Trump and Clinton. Furthermore, the article is full of negative information about Trump and Clinton while saying that Bernie Sanders is a much more favorable candidate.
Purpose: The main purpose for this article is to illustrate and amplify negativity towards Trump and Clinton. This can be seen from the way David Wright worded his presentation of the information, "That makes Trump and Clinton viewed more unfavorably than any front-runner for either party since 1984." Furthermore, the author seems to be in favor of Sanders as he talks about how Sanders would do better against Trump than Clinton, even though Sanders isn't even ahead of Clinton.
Context: This source is reliable because it comes from CNN, a nationally acknowledged news source. Furthermore, the article uses polling data from CBS/New York Times, two other well known news outlets.
3
"Trump: Same-Sex Marriage Is a Dead Issue"
by Bil Browning
via The Advocate
About the author: Bil Browning is a writer for the Advocate. Browning is a champion for LGBT writes, so the fact that he has a positive article about Trump is eye-opening as Trump is seen as anti-LGBT by a lot of people.
Target Audience: The intended audience for this article would be people who believe Donald Trump is anti-LGBT as well as people who are in favor of LGBT rights. This is because Trump is generally seen as anti-LGBT, and this article disproves that. Furthermore, The Advocate is a LGBT-interest magazine, so most of its articles are about LGBT rights.
Purpose: The main purpose for this article is to show that Trump is not as anti-LGBT as a lot of people make him out to me, and he does not believe gay-marriage is an issue. Additionally, the article seems to want to show that Trump is the best Republican candidate from when Browning states, "Other presidential candidates in the crowded Republican field have called for a constitutional amendment to overturn the June Supreme Court ruling that legalized same-sex marriage in the United States."
Context: This source is reliable because it comes from The Advocate, which is a magazine dedicated to LGBT news, and the article is about Trump's stance on an LGBT issue. Furthermore, the article is simply reporting a quote that Trump said from an interview, so their is raw information that can't be misconstrued.
4
"Illegal Alien Crime Wave in Texas: 611,234 Crimes, 2,993 Murders"
by J. Christian Adams
via PJ Media
About the author: Adams is an election lawyer who has worked in the U.S. Department of Justice. Adams also has written a New York Times Bestselling book.
Target Audience: The intended audience for this article would be people who lean on the right side of the U.S. political spectrum, (conservatives, libertarians), This can be seen because the article is anti illegal immigration/illegal aliens, as the article is a hit piece illustrating the problems that illegal immigrants have caused. Furthermore, PJ Media is a conservative based news outlet.
Purpose: The main purpose for this article is to show that the damages that illegal immigrants have caused, and thus is advocating for border control/illegal immigration control. The title itself illustrates the article's negative views on illegal immigration as the title itself refers to illegal immigrants as "aliens," a politically incorrect slur.
Context: This source is reliable because it comes from a well known news site (PJ Media). Furthermore, the article is filled with links to its sources which provides credibility in terms of its information.
5
"Hungarian Border Fence So Effective Illegal Immigrants Are Now At Pre Migrant-Crisis Levels"
by Oliver JJ Lane
via Breitbart
About the author: Oliver Lane is a writer for Breitbart London and reports on national defense, security, and radical Islam.
Target Audience: The intended audience for this article would be people who lean conservative or people who are in favor of or unsure of building a wall on a country's border. This is because Breitbart is a conservative news outlet, and the article is providing news on the effects of a border fence at stopping illegal immigration.
Purpose: The main purpose for this article is to show that the building a border fence/wall is an effective way to deter illegal immigrants. The article provides facts showing how Illegal Immigration has gotten better for Hungary after they put up a border fence. A good quote from the article that illustrates its overall purpose is: "strong borders and a strong defence were key to a nation’s prosperity."
Context: This source is reliable because it comes from a credible news site (Breitbart.com) and provides links to its sources for the information that it is providing.
6
"Trump denounces David Duke, KKK"
by Eugene Scott
via CNN
About the author: Eugene Scott is a reporter for CNN Politics and is covering the 2016 elections for them. Scott is also "a multiple award-winning journalist, recognized by the National Association of Black Journalists, the Society of Professional Journalists and Gannett Awards of Excellence, for his work related to politics, education and urban policy issues."
Target Audience: The intended audience for this article would be people interested in the 2016 presidential candidates, particularly those interested in Donald Trump. The article is dedicated to Trump information, and gives information on the overall election landscape on the Republican side.
Purpose: The main purpose for this article is to show that Donald Trump has disavowed David Duke, which was a concern for many when he would previously not comment on the matter. The title of the article clearly shows what the article is going to be about. Furthermore, the article seems to sympathize with Trump by giving a quote from Trump: "I'm not being treated the right way. I'm not being treated properly."
Context: This source is reliable because it comes from CNN, and provides video proof of what is being talked about.
"Is Donald Trump 2016’s most LGBT-friendly Republican?"
by Emma Margolin
via MSNBC
About the author: Emma Margolin is a reporter for MSNBC, and her primary areas of expertise are in LGBT, equality, and society. Her work has been published in the Princeton Journal of Bioethics.
Target Audience: The intended audience for this article would be liberals/independents as well as people interested in LGBT rights. MSNBC is a liberal leaning news outlet, and the article is about which Republican candidate is the most LGBT friendly.
Purpose: The main purpose for this article is to talk about the Republican presidential candidates in terms of their views on the LGBT community. The article does focus on Trump, as he is seen as the most LGBT-friendly Republican candidate. The article isn't fully pro-Trump, but it clearly supports Trump more than the other candidates. "Yet none of those candidates could ever be described as “pro-LGBT” – certainly not, at least, more so than Trump."
Context: This source is reliable because it comes from MSNBC which is a nationally accredited news outlet. Furthermore, the article comes out with quotes and facts and gives its own sources as well.
8
"Attorney: Trump Companies Employ More Female Execs Than Male"
by Chuck Ross
via MSNBC
About the author: Chuck Ross is a reporter at The Daily Caller and has published numerous articles about political topics.
Target Audience: The intended audience for this article would be conservatives as well as Trump supporters/haters. The Daily Caller is a conservative news outlet, and the article is centered around Trump, whom is very controversial and has a good amount of people who dislike and like him.
Purpose: The main purpose for this article is to disprove the idea that Trump is a misogynist by providing facts demonstrating how he is more than fair towards women (at least in the work force). The article is about Trump's fairness to his women employees, "Trump has maintained that he “cherishes” women and that he has long been progressive on the issue of employing women at the top levels of his companies."
Context: This source is reliable because it comes from a reliable and accredited news outlet in The Daily Caller. Furthermore, the article provides sources and facts to prove that what it is talking about is truthful.
9
"Donal Trump: Positions"
by Donald Trump
via DonaldJTrump.com
About the author: This source comes from Donald Trump's website, so it was directly written by him or one of his campaign workers.
Target Audience: The intended audience for this article would be people interested in Trump's political positions, and since he is running on the Republican ballot, Republicans/Independents would be his primary target. I feel as though this source is also targeting Trump haters, as a good majority of them do not actually know Trump's policy positions.
Purpose: The main purpose for this source is to clearly illustrate Trump's positions on several issues. The source simply states a number of issues, then provides Trump's positions on them. There really isn't much to it, all presidential candidates have a page like this on their websites, and they are intended to inform the public on where they stand.
Context: This source is reliable because it comes straight from the Donald himself. Since it is the official page of his campaign, it can be assumed that the information is credible.
10
"Donald Trump's proposed ban on Muslim immigrants could be legal, scholars say"
by David Savage
via The LA Times
About the author: "David G. Savage has covered the Supreme Court and legal issues for the Los Angeles Times in the Washington bureau since 1986." He has also been writing for the LA Times since 1981.
Target Audience: The intended audience for this article would be people interested about Trump's comments regarding stopping Muslims from entering the United States. The article discusses the legality of the issue and provides commentary on the morality of the issue as well.
Purpose: The main purpose for this source is to talk about the legality and morality of Trump's plan to ban Muslims from entering the United States for a period of time. The article talks about what scholars have concluded about the plan, and also provides insight on what people think about the plan.
Context: This source is reliable because it comes from a major newspaper in the LA Times. Furthermore, the article provides its sources and comes from an esteemed author/reporter.
Rhetorical Analysis of Project 3
With Projects 1 and 2 in the books, it is time to set my sites on the planning phase of Project 3. Project 3 involves creating a public argument over a specific controversy, and I have decided to argue why people should vote for Donald Trump by disproving common misconceptions about him and illustrating his positions on public issues. In this post, I am going to go over my personal rhetorical situation for this Project.
1. How will you draw on any or some of the following for Project 3? Be specific about how your plans for Project 3 connect to some previous, current or burgeoning interest of your own.
The reason I have decided on the topic I stated above for project 3 is because with the election season in full swing, I see a lot of lies and slander being thrown at various candidates, and I noticed that Donald Trump is an unfortunate victim to the agendas of people against him. To explain a little bit about me, I am a Computer Engineering student at the University of Arizona, I have lived in Arizona for all but two years of my life, and I would say I politically identify as a libertarian or at least fairly moderate.
2. What are the preconceptions, previously held opinions and/or potential areas for
personal bias that you should be aware of for Project 3? What about any of the
following?:
I think it is important to note that I am mixed race (half-Vietnamese, half white), and both of my parents are independents/moderates. My mom grew up rather poor as she was a refugee from the Vietnam war, but now both my parents would be considered middle to upper-middle class. I was raised Lutheran but religion was never strictly enforced in my household. Being from Arizona, I have grown up in a community with strong conservative and religious values.
Audience.
How are you thinking about your audience for this project? Who are you going to make this for? Describe them.
I feel like my audience for this project would be my peers (college age kids), as younger people tend to fall on the left side of the political scale, and in general do not like Trump. I know a lot of college kids are very liberal and blindly parrot a lot of the misconceptions that are spread about Trump. I've seen a lot of people who would hate you as a person for supporting Trump, which I feel is rather close-minded. So I have to be sure to keep in mind the dangerous nature of talking about politics, especially with a controversial figure such as Trump.
How are you going to relate to or connect with your audience? Are there any specific words, ideas or ways of arguing that will help you relate to them in this way?
I feel like I can relate to my audience because I am a college aged person as well, and I feel like I am a pretty normal person. I am not misogynist, racist, homophobic, or anything, which are some of the main arguments against Trump. Furthermore, I am not white, whom a lot of people believe are the only people who support Trump.
Think of one specific person or a set of people you know personally or professionally who fall within the definition of ‘target audience’ you’re using for Project 3. What could you tell them or say to them in order to convince them of your perspective? What would need to happen for them to agree with you?
One of my friends actually blindly hates on Trump even though he knows nothing about his policies or actual beliefs. In order to convince them, I would have to hit them with facts and not allow pre-existing conceptions interfere with my argument.
Purpose
What do you want to accomplish with Project 3? What affect do you want it to have on your intended audience?
After giving my argument, I would hope that my audience would want to vote for Donald Trump for president, or at least consider him a legitimate candidate whom isn't just the second coming of Hitler.
Once you’ve done all your research and figured out what you think about the controversy you’ve chosen, what still needs to be accomplished?
I think an important thing to note is that political views can be varied, and people should not vilify others over their political ideologies. Furthermore, it is important not to believe everything that is said by the mainstream media, because they have an agenda themselves a majority of the time.
When
Are there any historical events that might impact how your audience perceives your argument or the kind of background information or evidence you need to include? For instance, does media reporting on any of the following involve your issue/subject for Project 3?
The mainstream media plays a major role in terms of influence on my audience. A large number of media outlets are openly against Trump, who receives a lot of attention (albeit negative) in their programming. Because of this, people have a lot of preconceived conceptions about Trump although they don't really know his true beliefs. And because the election season is in full swing, there is a lot of political tension and information going around.
Author.
The reason I have decided on the topic I stated above for project 3 is because with the election season in full swing, I see a lot of lies and slander being thrown at various candidates, and I noticed that Donald Trump is an unfortunate victim to the agendas of people against him. To explain a little bit about me, I am a Computer Engineering student at the University of Arizona, I have lived in Arizona for all but two years of my life, and I would say I politically identify as a libertarian or at least fairly moderate.
2. What are the preconceptions, previously held opinions and/or potential areas for
personal bias that you should be aware of for Project 3? What about any of the
following?:
I think it is important to note that I am mixed race (half-Vietnamese, half white), and both of my parents are independents/moderates. My mom grew up rather poor as she was a refugee from the Vietnam war, but now both my parents would be considered middle to upper-middle class. I was raised Lutheran but religion was never strictly enforced in my household. Being from Arizona, I have grown up in a community with strong conservative and religious values.
Audience.
How are you thinking about your audience for this project? Who are you going to make this for? Describe them.
I feel like my audience for this project would be my peers (college age kids), as younger people tend to fall on the left side of the political scale, and in general do not like Trump. I know a lot of college kids are very liberal and blindly parrot a lot of the misconceptions that are spread about Trump. I've seen a lot of people who would hate you as a person for supporting Trump, which I feel is rather close-minded. So I have to be sure to keep in mind the dangerous nature of talking about politics, especially with a controversial figure such as Trump.
How are you going to relate to or connect with your audience? Are there any specific words, ideas or ways of arguing that will help you relate to them in this way?
I feel like I can relate to my audience because I am a college aged person as well, and I feel like I am a pretty normal person. I am not misogynist, racist, homophobic, or anything, which are some of the main arguments against Trump. Furthermore, I am not white, whom a lot of people believe are the only people who support Trump.
Think of one specific person or a set of people you know personally or professionally who fall within the definition of ‘target audience’ you’re using for Project 3. What could you tell them or say to them in order to convince them of your perspective? What would need to happen for them to agree with you?
One of my friends actually blindly hates on Trump even though he knows nothing about his policies or actual beliefs. In order to convince them, I would have to hit them with facts and not allow pre-existing conceptions interfere with my argument.
Purpose
What do you want to accomplish with Project 3? What affect do you want it to have on your intended audience?
After giving my argument, I would hope that my audience would want to vote for Donald Trump for president, or at least consider him a legitimate candidate whom isn't just the second coming of Hitler.
Once you’ve done all your research and figured out what you think about the controversy you’ve chosen, what still needs to be accomplished?
I think an important thing to note is that political views can be varied, and people should not vilify others over their political ideologies. Furthermore, it is important not to believe everything that is said by the mainstream media, because they have an agenda themselves a majority of the time.
What genre?
I will be writing in a standard college essay format. I have a ton of experience in this genre due to my years in AP English throughout High School, so I feel like I will not have too difficult of a time. In terms of expectations, my essay should be professional and organized properly. The fact that essays are professional will help in an argument because it will make the audience think you know what you are talking about. Furthermore, people tend to associate essays/articles as truth because they look clean and are used to the genre.
When
Are there any historical events that might impact how your audience perceives your argument or the kind of background information or evidence you need to include? For instance, does media reporting on any of the following involve your issue/subject for Project 3?
The mainstream media plays a major role in terms of influence on my audience. A large number of media outlets are openly against Trump, who receives a lot of attention (albeit negative) in their programming. Because of this, people have a lot of preconceived conceptions about Trump although they don't really know his true beliefs. And because the election season is in full swing, there is a lot of political tension and information going around.
Who else is talking about this topic? Provide us with working hyperlinks to coverage of the controversy on FOUR different media outlets.
1. http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/trump-rally-postponed-chicago-large-crowds-protesters-gather/story?id=37589985
2. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/donald-trump-a-champion-of-women-his-female-employees-think-so/2015/11/23/7eafac80-88da-11e5-9a07-453018f9a0ec_story.html
2. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/donald-trump-a-champion-of-women-his-female-employees-think-so/2015/11/23/7eafac80-88da-11e5-9a07-453018f9a0ec_story.html
What are the three or four major counter-arguments you’ll have to respond to, based upon what people are saying in the press/media? Be specific and cite your sources using working hyperlinks.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)