Freakonomics by Steven D. Levitt takes a fresh perspective on the modern world's crime, sports, and parenting, in what feels similar to my first marking period's IRB, Blink by Malcolm Gladwell. In fact, Malcolm Gladwell's review is on the cover of the book, demonstrating the similarities in writing style, primary audience, and topic to Gladwell's works. In the first chapter of Freakonomics, Levitt discusses incentives, particularly in the realm of "cheating teachers."
The primary rhetorical device is the use of statistics to appeal to the audience's sense of logic. For example, on page 22 Levitt uses a chart to demonstrates the drop in crime as society has advanced. To demonstrate crime, he uses the statistics for average number of homicides per 1000 people in several European countries for each century, because as he notes, "[homicide] is both the most reliably measured crime and the best barometer of a society's overall crime rate." This effectively demonstrates his claims in a credible, irrefutable manner. Using statistics is a way of saying to the audience "this is why I am correct in my statement. There is no arguing these facts." In this sense, it was a very effective choice to use these statistics early on in the book, as it establishes Levitt's credibility as a thinker and a writer, so the audience is more likely to agree with his other findings later on.
Sunday, February 24, 2013
Monday, February 18, 2013
Baby Kimye
In this week's TOW, Hadley Freeman wrote a biting "letter" to "Kimye," aka Kanye West's and Kim Kardashian's future baby, in which she gave advice for growing up in such a materialistic and egomaniacal world. Interestingly enough, Freeman writes for The Guardian, a British newspaper, when Kim and Kanye are primarily American "royalty." In fact, her outsider's perspective may have been the driving factor in shaping the piece, as it enabled her to criticize the lifestyles of Hollywood celebrities today and lend the work the tone of absolute disgust. In a world where TMZ and In Touch Weekly devote so much time and energy gossiping over potential names and outfits for the baby-to-be, Freeman manages to question why the world cares by mocking the genre of "trashy" tabloids thematically.
Her article is set up as an open letter to the future baby, as if the baby can read it within Kim's womb to prepare for its entrance into the world of fame and fortune. This format is explained very clearly by Freeman, who writes, "The open letter is a crucial part of the British journalist's arsenal, only deployed in the most arrogant of tones and for the most important of issues, such as when a journalist does not like a director's recent filmor when the journalist is concerned about Kate Middleton's diet. So feel the validation here, Baby Kimye." She continues each paragraph by discussing the baby's tabloid-dubbed name and its reflection of the parents' selfishness, the low-class drama that follows around Kanye and the Kardashian klan, and her expectations for the birth of the baby to be televised on E! for the sake of entertainment. Moreover, each observation of the family is followed by lines of praise towards the baby and its family, although this praise is very clearly ironic and meant to show the faults of others for worshipping these "talentless" people.
Freeman ends her letter by writing, "Kimye, you are no mere baby. You are the climactic epitome of all that US culture has been headed towards for the past 20 years, combining as you do reality TV, musical talent, fame with no talent, famous for being famous, celebrity, the debasing of hip-hop, a bottomless need for attention, sex tapes, hip-hop, bad fashion, Twitter, Instagram, tmz.com, the E! channel and OJ Simpson. You are America's Golden Child, Kimye. We bow before you." I sincerely think there are no more insulting words towards the vanity of Hollywood's stars and their worshipping public, and the use of words such as "culture" and "America's Golden Child" only highlight the disappointment Freeman has in the modern world.
I occasionally enjoy watching KUWtK, as I find it entertaining to watch the mayhem of such a superficial lifestyle, but after reading this I realize that even watching the show as a joke is feeding the public image and hype over these people, and I have made a resolution to stop caring about this poor baby, except to recognize the tragedy of having to grow up with these selfish people as parents. For that, I think that this "letter" was very effective in accomplishing its purpose.
Her article is set up as an open letter to the future baby, as if the baby can read it within Kim's womb to prepare for its entrance into the world of fame and fortune. This format is explained very clearly by Freeman, who writes, "The open letter is a crucial part of the British journalist's arsenal, only deployed in the most arrogant of tones and for the most important of issues, such as when a journalist does not like a director's recent filmor when the journalist is concerned about Kate Middleton's diet. So feel the validation here, Baby Kimye." She continues each paragraph by discussing the baby's tabloid-dubbed name and its reflection of the parents' selfishness, the low-class drama that follows around Kanye and the Kardashian klan, and her expectations for the birth of the baby to be televised on E! for the sake of entertainment. Moreover, each observation of the family is followed by lines of praise towards the baby and its family, although this praise is very clearly ironic and meant to show the faults of others for worshipping these "talentless" people.
Freeman ends her letter by writing, "Kimye, you are no mere baby. You are the climactic epitome of all that US culture has been headed towards for the past 20 years, combining as you do reality TV, musical talent, fame with no talent, famous for being famous, celebrity, the debasing of hip-hop, a bottomless need for attention, sex tapes, hip-hop, bad fashion, Twitter, Instagram, tmz.com, the E! channel and OJ Simpson. You are America's Golden Child, Kimye. We bow before you." I sincerely think there are no more insulting words towards the vanity of Hollywood's stars and their worshipping public, and the use of words such as "culture" and "America's Golden Child" only highlight the disappointment Freeman has in the modern world.
I occasionally enjoy watching KUWtK, as I find it entertaining to watch the mayhem of such a superficial lifestyle, but after reading this I realize that even watching the show as a joke is feeding the public image and hype over these people, and I have made a resolution to stop caring about this poor baby, except to recognize the tragedy of having to grow up with these selfish people as parents. For that, I think that this "letter" was very effective in accomplishing its purpose.
Sunday, February 10, 2013
Drones beat the alternative: USA Today
I've been hearing about drones on the news a lot lately, and today when I asked my dad about them, he told me they were essentially remote controlled aerial vehicle that could target and kill Al-Qaida terrorists. Intrigued, I decided to do this week's TOW on an article explaining why drones should be utilized by the American military. Written by the editorial board of USA Today, this article makes the claim, "But for all the controversy, the drone attacks have this going for them: They are effective, and the other options are worse."
This article utilized logos to make its point, by pointing out the flaws in the opposing side's argument (They Say/I Say) and making its own argument that drones are the best way to prevent as much death of "collateral" citizens as possible. The article actually begins by pointing out common concerns with drones, but proceeds to demonstrate that these risks are worth it. By using the technique of "They Say/I Say," the article effectively establishes credibility by proving that the authors have knowledge of both sides and are making their claim very deliberately. It also helps demonstrate why readers shouldn't side with the opposition, or that they should change their mind if they already are "anti-drone."
The article also qualifies its argument by stating that the White House should be more open about the "gray area" surrounding drones, which again demonstrates the authors' credibility in their claim that "drones should keep flying." They also implied that the secrecy surrounding the deaths of three US citizens via drones was haunting, but the article did not go far into this topic, as it might contradict the argument being made.
Before reading this article, I was concerned with the use of drones because I feared that they might be used on US citizens, especially once other countries had the technology to build their own drones. I also was concerned with the ethics of killing people in this manner, but after reading this article I realized that drones are in fact one of the most ethical methods of assassinating terrorists leaders, because by this article's figures, fewer civilians are killed in the process. While I am still concerned with their use in killing American citizens (I haven't decided my opinion on killing American Al-Qaida leaders), this article effectively made me reconsider my views and want to look further into the topic of military drones.
This article utilized logos to make its point, by pointing out the flaws in the opposing side's argument (They Say/I Say) and making its own argument that drones are the best way to prevent as much death of "collateral" citizens as possible. The article actually begins by pointing out common concerns with drones, but proceeds to demonstrate that these risks are worth it. By using the technique of "They Say/I Say," the article effectively establishes credibility by proving that the authors have knowledge of both sides and are making their claim very deliberately. It also helps demonstrate why readers shouldn't side with the opposition, or that they should change their mind if they already are "anti-drone."
The article also qualifies its argument by stating that the White House should be more open about the "gray area" surrounding drones, which again demonstrates the authors' credibility in their claim that "drones should keep flying." They also implied that the secrecy surrounding the deaths of three US citizens via drones was haunting, but the article did not go far into this topic, as it might contradict the argument being made.
Before reading this article, I was concerned with the use of drones because I feared that they might be used on US citizens, especially once other countries had the technology to build their own drones. I also was concerned with the ethics of killing people in this manner, but after reading this article I realized that drones are in fact one of the most ethical methods of assassinating terrorists leaders, because by this article's figures, fewer civilians are killed in the process. While I am still concerned with their use in killing American citizens (I haven't decided my opinion on killing American Al-Qaida leaders), this article effectively made me reconsider my views and want to look further into the topic of military drones.
Sunday, February 3, 2013
Superbowl Advertisement: Brave Audi
In honor of Super Bowl Sunday, I decided to make my TOW about a powerful advertisement for Audi, in which a teenage boy takes the car to prom and in doing so gains the confidence to kiss the girl of his dreams. The Super Bowl is known for its advertisements, which in some cases attract more viewers than the actual game itself. As a result of this notoriety, several Super Bowl ads rely more on being entertaining and interesting than actually informative, so as to increase awareness about their product, rather than relying mainly on logos to sway an audience.
The advertisement made the argument that the audience should purchase an Audi, based on the evidence that the boy shown gained enormous confidence simply by driving one. This was demonstrated by the progression of the boy from awkwardly having his mother pin his boutonniere on in a dark house (the lighting reflected the somber mood), to riding away from prom with a black eye (from the girl's Prom King boyfriend) and screaming at the top of his lungs, apparently full of excitement from living life to its fullest. The assumption is that the audience should feel confident when driving a car, which fits the luxury type cars that Audi sells. Furthermore, the target audience of this commercial is primarily teenagers who are searching for their first car (since they can relate to the boy shown) and their parents, since the dad's "cool" gesture to his son was a message to other parents about a potential way to connect with their teens.
The details are what made this advertisement special. The boy starts out in a dark house, with his younger sister making comments about his single status that only further emphasize how "uncool" he is. As he sits down in the Audi, the bright lights illuminate the logo, and from that point onward the commercial is a blaze of flashing lights, pump-up music, and confident smiles. The boy parks in the Principal's parking lot (an example of the "carpe diem" attitude inspired by the Audi,) gets noticed by the students who have supposedly ignored him until that moment, and speeds along an empty, lit bridge to complete the picture of pure exhilaration. The effect of these details was to make the audience feel the emotion of the boy as if they were him, although I'm not sure the advertisement was entirely effective.
Perhaps it is because I live in a society that has become so immune to the messages of advertisements, but I feel no real desire to go out and buy an Audi simply because some actor rode in one and had "the time of his life." To be effective, I would need statistics about other features of the car, such as its price, fuel efficiency, and durability. In a sense, I am "begging the question" about the major premise of this advertisement. However, if the point of the ad was for me to remember the commercial and the car brand, then clearly it was effective, as I chose this commercial out of several of the night to write about.
http://www.hulu.com/adzone/450448?playlist_id=1031&asset_scope=all
The advertisement made the argument that the audience should purchase an Audi, based on the evidence that the boy shown gained enormous confidence simply by driving one. This was demonstrated by the progression of the boy from awkwardly having his mother pin his boutonniere on in a dark house (the lighting reflected the somber mood), to riding away from prom with a black eye (from the girl's Prom King boyfriend) and screaming at the top of his lungs, apparently full of excitement from living life to its fullest. The assumption is that the audience should feel confident when driving a car, which fits the luxury type cars that Audi sells. Furthermore, the target audience of this commercial is primarily teenagers who are searching for their first car (since they can relate to the boy shown) and their parents, since the dad's "cool" gesture to his son was a message to other parents about a potential way to connect with their teens.
The details are what made this advertisement special. The boy starts out in a dark house, with his younger sister making comments about his single status that only further emphasize how "uncool" he is. As he sits down in the Audi, the bright lights illuminate the logo, and from that point onward the commercial is a blaze of flashing lights, pump-up music, and confident smiles. The boy parks in the Principal's parking lot (an example of the "carpe diem" attitude inspired by the Audi,) gets noticed by the students who have supposedly ignored him until that moment, and speeds along an empty, lit bridge to complete the picture of pure exhilaration. The effect of these details was to make the audience feel the emotion of the boy as if they were him, although I'm not sure the advertisement was entirely effective.
Perhaps it is because I live in a society that has become so immune to the messages of advertisements, but I feel no real desire to go out and buy an Audi simply because some actor rode in one and had "the time of his life." To be effective, I would need statistics about other features of the car, such as its price, fuel efficiency, and durability. In a sense, I am "begging the question" about the major premise of this advertisement. However, if the point of the ad was for me to remember the commercial and the car brand, then clearly it was effective, as I chose this commercial out of several of the night to write about.
http://www.hulu.com/adzone/450448?playlist_id=1031&asset_scope=all
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)