"The great bee bumble: Cheerios wanted to help. Its plan went terribly wrong"Author of the article Darryl Fears.
This article describes how Cheerios is trying to help benefit the world by implementing a new campaign called Bring Back the Bees. Darryl Fears creates passionate diction by supporting reasons why the Bring Back Bees campaign is harmful towards the environment. Darryl Fears includes words like imperiled and revelation. You can tell that Darryl Fears has a passion for the environment; Darryl describes how the seeds that General Mills packaged can potentially harm the environment. Using words like imperiled and revelation helps create a critical tone because General Mill is packaging seeds that are considered as invasive species. Darryl Fears appeals to ethos by including Turner an evolutionary biologist who described the impact of invasive species on the environment. Turner states“The original plant listing included a plant that was invasive,” Turner said Wednesday. The revelation seemed to pain Turner because she knows that bees are in trouble — disappearing by the millions, which, in turn, puts many crops they pollinate at risk — and that General Mills was trying to do a good thing."The reason why Darryl Fears appeals to ethos is because she wants her audience to trust her. Establishing credibility also makes Darryl Fears seem knowledgeable when describing about the issue. Darryl Fears also appeals to logos by providing statistics on the Bring Back the Bees campaign. Darryl Fears writes "Cheerios, owned by General Mills, stuck 1.5 billion packaged wildflower seeds in boxes so that patrons could plant them." Darryl Fears appeals to logos to place an emphasis on the power of General Mills and its potential to influence society by trying to plant new flowers. Darryl Fears creates a critical tone when he describes the negative impact of the Bring Back the Bees campaign. Darryl Fears states that the seeds imported by General Mills are invasive species and can take over the environment. Tonal shift occurs when Darryl Fears describes the negative impacts of invasive species to a positive tone where Darryl Fears encourages people to plant new wildflowers too help increase pollination. Darryl Fears main goal is to inform and educate the audience on invasive species and its impact on the environment. I feel that Darryl Fears does a oustanding job at explaining the negitive impacts of invasive species, "Forget-Me-Not … is banned as a noxious weed in Massachusetts and Connecticut, for example. The California poppy is nice in California, but listed as an invasive and exotic pest plant in southeastern states. And many of the flowers on this list are not native anywhere in the U.S., so they are not necessarily good matches for local bees." Darryl Fears starts his argument by introducing Cheerios's plan to habitat by planting new wildflowers. Darryl Fears addresses how General Mills packaged seeds that were considered as invasive species in southeastern America. Darryl Fears incorporates a evolutionist biologist to support his argument along with descriptive impacts of invasive species. I feel that Darryl Fears argument was solid but Darryl needs to talk about the Bring Back the Bees campaign more. When I first read the article, I was somewhat confused on the purpose of the Bring Back the Bees campaign and how it would be accomplished. Link: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/animalia/wp/2017/03/30/the-great-bee-bumble-cheerios-wanted-to-help-its-plan-went-terribly-wrong/?utm_term=.a823572fb81b
0 Comments
"Aaron Hernandez hanged himself in prison. His death comes as inmate suicides are surging."Author of the article Mark Berman.
This article highlights the death of Aaron Hernandez and how prison suicide is becoming an issue. Mark Berman appeals to logos by writing "Suicide has long been the leading cause of death for inmates in local jails, according to national statistics gathered by the Justice Department. In state prisons, where inmates are typically held for longer sentences, most inmate deaths are due to illnesses, the national statistics show, but the number of inmates taking their own lives has sharply increased.." The use of statistics places an emphasis on prison suicide and how it is becoming an issue. It also makes Mark Berman seem knowledgeable about prison suicide. Mark Berman also appeals to ethos stating "the Justice Department", "National Institute of Corrections", and "Massachusetts Department of Corrections." This makes Mark Berman seem credible, so the audience would trust what Mark Berman is saying. Mark Berman creates a gloomy tone by describing how Aaron Hernandez; a famous professional football player committed suicide in prison even when he just got acquired for a trial. By using the word exacerbate, it creates a gloomy tone, "Experts say that jails tend to exacerbate suicidal behavior. In a 2010 report examining such deaths, the National Institute of Corrections said that inmates can wind up overwhelmed by the sudden stress of confinement in a jail cell." Mark Berman tries to inform the audience about the increasing concern of prison suicides and by placing an emphasis on Aaron Hernandaz's death. This can be demonstrated by "Authorities said that Hernandez, who in 2015 was sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole, hanged himself inside his cell." Mark Berman wants the audience to understand why the death of Aaron Hernandez could have been prevented and why prison suicides are a increasing concern. Mark Berman introduces his argument by stating how Aaron Hernandez committed suicide. Mark Berman then provides statistics on how many prison success occur and how prison suicides are increasing. Mark Berman ends his argument by placing emphasis on how Massachusetts's prison system has been receiving scrutiny for number of suicides that occur. Mark Berman provides statistics on prison suicides from the Bureau of Justice Statistics and several reports as his evidence. I feel like Mark Berman's argument was solid because he provided solid facts on prison suicides. For example, Mark Berman writes "Another study of prison suicides in 2014 found that more than half of inmates who committed suicide were between the ages of 25 and 34. The same study determined that “impulsivity can be a factor in young prisoners,” adding that “upper socioeconomic status” increased the risk of suicide in prison." The numerous amount of statistics on prison suicides helps make Mark Berman's argument solid. One part of the article where Mark Berman should make stronger is when he describes Aaron Hernandez and how he was impacted by the court trials. Mark Berman should go in more depth into the trials that Aaron Hernandez went through, and possibly incorporate emotions from his girlfriend and his daughter. After reading the article, I notice that Mark Berman creates ordinary diction. Mark Berman mainly uses easy to read and understand words and rarely uses complex words. One reason why Mark Berman uses simple words is to allow the audience to understand the issue on prison suicides. Link: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2017/04/19/aaron-hernandez-hanged-himself-in-prison-his-death-comes-amid-a-surge-in-inmate-suicides/?utm_term=.0a328b29d731 "The luxury of telling poor people that iPhones are a luxury"Author of the article Brian Fung.
In this article, Brian Fung argues that all Americans need to understand and decide how to spend their money effectively and assume personal responsibly. Brian Fung tries to inform people that smartphones can be beneficial because Americans use it to find new jobs, and to access the internet. Brian Fung presents a strong counter argument that if you don't buy a new iPhone it doesn't mean the money can be used to cover health care. Brian Fung states, "Even the most expensive iPhone is a tiny fraction of what most people pay for health care every year. Giving up a $769 iPhone would not make health care any more affordable in a meaningful sense. To truly cover medical costs, a typical American would need to give up 23 iPhone 7 Pluses, every two years." Brian Fung appeals to logos by writing "The Pew Research Center has done extensive study on American cellphone users. It has found that 62 percent have used their smartphones to get information about a health condition. Fifty-seven percent have used a smartphone to do online banking. Forty-three percent have used one to look for jobs." This statistic emphasizes the importance of having a smartphone. Brian Fung adds, "For many lower-income Americans, smartphones are the only realistic way to get online. As many as 10 percent of U.S. adults — more than 24 million — pinch pennies by paying for a smartphone plan only." Smartphones can be used for anything and can help a person carry out various tasks. Brian Fung also appeals to ethos by stating the Pew Research Center. This is important because the audience will view Brian Fung as credible and allows the reader to trust what he is saying. Brian Fung creates precise diction by using words like dynamic, sentiment, flourish, superfluous, and chastises. By using these vivid words, it clearly demonstrates Brian Fung's positive attitude towards smartphones. Brian Fung creates a didactic tone by presenting facts and reasons why smartphones are beneficial to everybody. Brian Fung provides statistics to help inform the reader, "Surveys show that lower-income and minority people increasingly rely on smartphones for Internet access, since they can't afford both home and mobile broadband subscriptions." Brian Fung educates the reader that buying a smartphone can help families with low income. Brain Fung approaches his argument by tacking the main question on whether or not Americans should buy new phones or invest in healthcare. Brain Fung quickly backs up his argument by stating "Even the most expensive iPhone is a tiny fraction of what most people pay for health care every year. Giving up a $769 iPhone would not make health care any more affordable in a meaningful sense. To truly cover medical costs, a typical American would need to give up 23 iPhone 7 Pluses, every two years." Brian Fung then provides strong statistics on why smartphones are important and then he ends his argument by describing Maslow's hierarchy of needs. Overall, Brian Fung's argument was solid because he started off strong by countering the question on smartphones vs healthcare. Brian Fung also provided descriptive statistics on the importance of smartphones which made his argument solid. Link: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2017/03/08/the-luxury-of-telling-poor-people-that-iphones-are-a-luxury/?utm_term=.8bca760de896 "Four memorials damaged with graffiti over holiday weekend"Authors of the article: Perry Stein and Dana Hedgpeth.
This article described the damages that occurred to four famous memorials in Washington D.C. Perry Stein and Dana Hedgpeth creates common diction through the use of everyday words. Perry Stein and Dana Hedgpeth uses simple words to describe the vandalism that occurred. The authors mainly use simple words but they used words like defacing, incompetent and spattered to describe a similar situation involving vandalism. Perry Stein and Dana Hedgpeth use the word scrawled to illustrate what happened, "The vandalism was scrawled in black permanent marker. Two of the messages were at the Lincoln Memorial: one in the memorial and another at the foot of the steps." The authors were clearly interested in writing this article because they included pictures of the damages and incorporated several solutions to help fix the damages. Perry Stein and Dana Hedgpeth states "Work crews expect the cleaning to take about two weeks with several rounds of treatments using solvents." The authors appeal to logos by providing a official case that dealt with vandalism. Perry Stein writes "In 2015, a case was dismissed against a Chinese woman who was suspected of tossing green paint on several D.C. landmarks, including the Lincoln Memorial, after a judge determined she was incompetent to stand trial. Jiamei Tian had been charged in 2013 with one count of defacing property after paint was found spattered in Washington National Cathedral." The reason why the authors appealed to logos was emphasize the consequences of vandalism. The vandalism caused by splattering the paint lead to dozen applications of solvent on the property. Vandalism can create permanent damage and can lead to negative long term damage. Perry Stein and Dana Hedgpeth create an outraged tone by describing the violent acts that occurred. For example, "Other acts of vandalism were found on street signs and utility boxes on the Mall. Some of the words in the messages were hard to decipher. One message said, Jackie shot JFK. Another mentioned the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center. And another part of the graffiti said that blood test is a lie and mentioned leukemia, cancer and HIV." Tonal shift occurs when the authors describe how the monuments were damaged which created an outraged tone to an optimistic tone when the authors described how the situation would be solved. This can be supported by, "It often takes several treatments to remove graffiti from monuments, and authorities have to avoid causing long-term damage, said Mike Litterst, a spokesman for the National Park Service. Work crews expect the cleaning to take about two weeks with several rounds of treatments using solvents." Perry Stein and Dana Hedgpeth's purpose is to inform the public of vandalism on historical monuments. Perry Stein and Dana Hedgpeth wants the audience to understand why it is wrong to damage historical property. Perry Stein and Dana Hedgpeth provides pictures of the damage that occurred, this confirms the actual damage that occurred. Perry Stein and Dana Hedgpeth creates a solid argument by providing clear pictures of the damages that occurred and describing a court case on vandalism. Link: https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/public-safety/three-dc-monuments-damaged-with-graffiti-over-holiday-weekend/2017/02/21/2f01610a-f842-11e6-bf01-d47f8cf9b643_story.html?utm_term=.2f4a802d729b "Lethal injection drugs are scarce. Arizona wants its death row inmates to bring their own"Author of the article: Cleve R. Wootson Jr.
This article examines the ineffective use of lethal injections that are used for the death penalty. It also highlights how Arizona encourages its death row inmates to bring their own form of an execution drug. Cleve Wootson creates precise diction through the use of descriptive words. Some words include snorted, gased, agonizing, flabbergasted, embroiled, untenable, and writhing. Cleve Wootson does a great job at countering the argument. People argue how the death penalty should be used due to the severe crimes that the inmate has committed. Cleve Wootson writes "Companies that manufacture the most common lethal injection drugs have stopped shipping them to death penalty states, distancing themselves from a practice many view as barbaric. Some medical professionals have taken a similar stance, saying their duty is to save lives, not end them." Cleve Wootson incorporates statements from an attorney to create an accusatory tone. Cleve Wootson writes “I’m flabbergasted,” said Dale Baich, one of Wood’s attorneys, who is still embroiled in a death penalty lawsuit against the state. “I can’t comprehend why the Arizona Department of Corrections did what it did and what it was thinking.” The words flabbergasted and embroiled contribute to the accusatory tone. Dale Baich clearly expresses negative emotions towards Arizona's new policy that allows inmates to bring lethal drugs. Cleve Wootson later adds "But Baich said it’s untenable to think that an attorney who spent years fighting for a client’s life would help kill him." The word untenable also shows strong feelings that Arizona's decision on lethal drugs is wrong and should be removed. Cleve Wootson appeals to logos to help the audience understand the impact of the Death Penalty. For example, Cleve Wootson states "For people convicted after 1992, lethal injection is the only legal method of executing people in Arizona, which has 126 people on death row, according to the Death Penalty Information Center. The state has executed 141 people in total, although no executions are scheduled." This statistic from the Death Penalty Information Center makes it eye opening for the reader and makes the author seem knowledgeable. Cleve Wootson tries to inform people about the death penalty and how cruel it is. Cleve Wootson tries to inform people about Arizona's decision to allow its inmates on the death row to bring their own form of lethal drug. This is controversial because death occurs slowly and may not kill the person. This can be supported in the passage, "Oklahoma’s most high-profile botched execution drew criticism from former president Barack Obama and the United Nations. After midazolam was injected into Clayton Lockett, the Oklahoma inmate lived for 43 minutes — convulsing, writhing and calling out from the gurney — before ultimately dying of a heart attack." Cleve Wootson presents his argument by describing the death penalty and including examples of people who died from the use of lethal injections. In the middle of the article, Cleve Wootson introduces the fact that Arizona is allowing inmates on the death row to bring their own lethal injections. Cleve Wootson ends his argument by providing detailed stories of inmates who died slowly to the lethal injections and argues that lethal injections may not be effective. The detailed stories of the inmates who died slowly to the lethal injections creates a gloomy tone. Cleve Wootson provides detailed stories of inmates who died from the use of lethal injections and statistics to support his argument. Link: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2017/02/18/lethal-injection-drugs-are-scarce-arizona-wants-its-death-row-inmates-to-bring-their-own/?utm_term=.a1215d52c28d "These kids heard their parents fighting. The next day, they told teachers their mom was dead"Author of the article Lindsey Bever.
In this article is describes the horrific situation that occurred when a mother of three kids witnessed the death of their mother. In this article, Lindsey Bever provides a strong argument that clearly addresses that Yadira Gomez was murdered by her husband. Lindsey Bever provides evidence by providing statements from the prosecutors "Prosecutors said Roldan-Marron stabbed Gomez numerous times in the chest." Lindsey Bever appeals to pathos which makes the audience want to read more about the death of Yadira Gomez. For example, Lindsey Bever writes "The 9-year-old found his mother, Yadira Gomez, on her bedroom floor Sunday in their apartment in Independence, Mo. — covered in blood, with one eye still open, he told police. The knife was next to her, he said. The boy said that he went back downstairs to draw his mother a picture “because he thought she was dead." The words blood, and knife makes the audience feel disgusted. The fact that the young kid drew a picture for his mother after she was killed is what makes the audience feel disgusted. In a statement made by police spokesmen John Syme he states "Not only do these kids lose the mother, they are losing their father. It is not something that children should ever experience." This appeals to pathos because it makes the audience feel worried. To support the death of Yadira Gomez, Lindsey Bever provides a personal account of the nine year old, "The boy said his parents started to argue in the church parking lot and the fight continued when they got home, where the two started to hit each other, according to the court documents. One of the children touched Gomez’s stomach to see if she was breathing, according to the court documents. She was not." The reason why Lindsey Bever wrote this article was to inform the public on the horrific event that occurred and try to get help for the children who need support. This article was successful because the kids new family got over $3,000 of donations and is continuing to get donations. I really like how Lindsey Bever described the aftermath of the situation, by describing how the kids would go to their maternal grandparents house. I also like how Lindsey Bever incorporated statements from a police spokesmen, court records, and the perspectives of the kids. The multiple perspective helps convey a better understanding of what happened. For example, Lindsey Bever writes "He told officers that he had drunk several cans of beer and several bottles of champagne Sunday, then woke up and realized that his wife was dead. After he dropped the children at school Monday, he said, he returned to the apartment and took numerous pills, suggesting that he wanted to end his life, according to the court records." The perspective of the husband helps give his side of the story and how alcohol may have impacted the way he thought. Lindsey Bever creates a morose tone by describing how Yadira Gomez was killed. Lindsey Bever writes "Yadira Gomez, on her bedroom floor Sunday in their apartment in Independence, Mo. — covered in blood, with one eye still open... Roldan-Marron stabbed Gomez numerous times in the chest." Tonal shift is also demonstrated in the article when Lindsey Bever describes how Yadira Gomez was known as family oriented and how she was a caring mother then the tone changes to jovial when it described how the kids will have a new loving home and how the kids are receiving donations. Lindsey Bever also appeals to ethos because she wants the audience to believe what she is saying is true. Lindsey Bever establishes her credibility by providing statements from the police and prosecutors. Lindsey Bever creates common diction through the use of simple, easy to understand words. Since Lindsey Bever wants adults and young adults to read the article she uses simple, easy to understand words. I can tell Lindsey Bever was highly interested in writing this article because she incorporated the kids perspective, the husbands perspective, the police perspective. Lindsey Bever also provided detail on what happened to the kids after both of horrific event. Link: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/true-crime/wp/2017/02/03/these-kids-heard-their-parents-fighting-the-next-day-they-told-teachers-their-mom-was-dead/?utm_term=.1e29fee26557 "Protesters vowed to shut down the city. Police vowed to protect the inauguration. They clashed."Authors of the article: Peter Hermann, Theresa Vargas, Perry Stein. This article described the conflict between the protesters and the police in Washington, when Donald Trump became the president of the United States of America. Peter Hermann, Theresa Vargas, and Perry Stein creates passionate diction through the use of emotional words. Some words include swarmed, charging, and paralyze. Peter Hermann, Theresa Vargas, and Perry Stein described the emotions of the protesters and the police. The authors interviewed several protesters and one individual described “I have the right to exist. I have the right not to live in fear,” she said. She said she was protesting “everything Donald Trump stands for” (Peter Hermann). This clearly indicates the passion that the protesters had. The protesters also showed their passion by protesting into the night, MacAuley states "the protests would continue into the night targeting the inaugural balls." The authors showed their interest about the protests by interviewing police officers, protesters, and ordinary citizens. By interviewing people from different sides of the situation the authors establishes their credibility. Peter Hermann, Theresa Vargas, and Perry Stein interviewed an ordinary bystander to capture their view on the protesters. For example, it states "Robert Hrifko, 62, who rode his Harley Davidson motorcycle from St. Augustine, Fla., to join the Bikers for Trump group, said he tackled a protester who tried to throw an aluminum chair at a police officer. Another man then allegedly hit the biker in the face with a rock." Even a police Lieutenant was interviewed for his perspective on the situation, Anthony Washington said "We are here to protect their rights to protest. We’re allowing everyone to be peaceful." The author appeals to ethos because they want their audience to know that their source is reputable and provides accurate details of what happened during the protest. Peter Hermann, Theresa Vargas, and Perry Stein creates an objective tone to help inform the audience of the protests in Washington. The authors presents no bias in the article because the article describes why the protests were happening and it provides a perspective from the police side. Also ordinary people were presented in the article to show their own perspective of the protests. It is clear that the authors present no bias and examined the situation from multiple perspectives. The authors also provided statements from the Mayor to touch on the issue of the protests. Mayor Muriel E. Bowser states "to ensure anyone wishing to peaceably exercise their First Amendment rights . . . has a safe environment to do so.” And it ended with the mayor warning that “the damage that has occurred today is unacceptable and not welcome in D.C.” While it portrays the police as enforcing the safety of the people, the article states "At least one bystander was injured when a flash-bang went off, and there were reports of bystanders struck by pepper spray." The overall goal of the article is to inform the audience of the violent protests that is occurring due to the new election of Donald Trump. This article is important because it provides multiple interviews from people that witnessed the protests. The article highlights the violence that occurred in the protest and what the police did to control the violence. For example, in the article is states "At several protest locations, police were seen throwing or rolling “flash-bang” or “percussion grenade” devices. Police said they are investigating the reported use, but noted some officers said protesters were using them as well." The authors construct their argument by presenting the protester's actions at the beginning. In the middle of the argument the authors provides reason why the protesters are protesting and also provides a perspective from the police side. At the end of the argument the authors includes statements from ordinary people who witnessed the protests. The argument is overall solid because it describes the reasons why the protesters were protesting. It described what the protesters did and what the police did to control the protests. The authors also includes an investigation about DisruptJ20 which is a protest group. Based on the investigation the police was successful in stopping a planned protest attack. The authors also included several images of the protests which helps illustrate the protests that occurred. Link: https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/public-safety/protesters-vowed-to-shut-down-the-city-police-vowed-to-protect-the-inauguration-they-clashed/2017/01/20/0a1b2d1a-df4e-11e6-ad42-f3375f271c9c_story.html?utm_term=.4334500d853c
|