Lorde uses guilt as a tool to awaken her readers to their own identities and to reflect on the identities of others. Guilt itself serves no purpose, it simply distracts from the real pain. Yet, coupled with recognition of entitlement, guilt can become the catalyst for change. Lorde slowly gets her audience adjusted to feeling uneasy before she nudges them towards feeling guilty. However, before she let’s them fall into the pit of remorse, Lorde reminds her readers that there are still ways that they can
The killing of her father works, but they should exchange some witty banter. The flashback with Angelique regarding the women slaves is not needed, it hinders the pace, and her backstory is enough. Angelique can 't hurt Leigha and this shows her vulnerability and makes her complex. Leigha, as mentioned, is the sweet little girl that everyone loves. She claims her mother’s name was “Beth?” But it’s Megan (page 23).
The reason Megyn Kelly chooses this part of the story was because people watch the program may have a strong conservative view on the handling of terrorists; it aims at assembling an audience that shares its point of view as Megyn Kelly. Questions like “What was the motive to leave his post?” or “What is the diplomatic protocol call for such actions?” There are more effective tactics to get straight answers from someone from the State Department. Megyn Kelly asking the wrong questions to the spokesperson can make he or she seem ignorant to the audience. Also, its misleading because of the question itself is stated as an opinion based question, not as a fact-based question. The proper way to ask a question in news report is to appeal to a universal audience by its non-political, objective point of view of the story and its commitment to reporting only the facts.
In terms of the impact of internet on how we read, Carr believes that people do not read the entire article and it is seen that they bounce from page to page, losing focus quickly with reading on the web. He uses this idea because the reader can relate to it, like himself. Carr also explains about because of the easiness of the internet, it makes people full of artificial knowledge when he writes about the impact of the internet on the way how we think. He elaborates on how the growing technology affects the human life and their culture. He mentions Foreman’s life experience with related to how his life is surrounded by the internet.
It was after reading Perlstein’s article that Addison masterfully wrote her counter argument which successfully contradicted the opinionated, inaccurate views of Rick Perlstein. Although Rick Perlstein and Liz Addison both wrote their article with the same purpose of appealing to the readers’ sense of emotion, credibility
The internet along with many other technological advances has brought humanity a long way. Like with all change, there are positive outcomes as well as negative outcomes, and while having information at our fingerprints and obtainable within seconds might be a positive thing, there are still going to be some negative results. Nicholas Carr’s 2008 article published in The Atlantic, “Is Google Making Us Stupid?,” explains what Carr believes to be some of the negative effects that the usage of the Internet has brought upon us. Carr believes that the Internet is shaping the way that we think and that humans are losing the ability to read long pieces of writing. The purpose of his ironically long article is to convince his readers that the Internet is actually changing the way that we think and interact and to shed light upon something that many people experience, but they might have not realized it yet.
Professor and philosopher, Jason Zinser, in “The Good, the Bad and The Daily Show” addresses the topic of “fake” news, and tries to decide if shows such as The Daily Show are good resources for people to use. Are these shows a suitable replacement for "real" news? In the article he states that “fake” news shows have their “virtues and vices”. At the end of the article, Zinser believes that as a whole the shows helps the viewers learn about current events. Zinser uses ethical appeal, logical appeal, and emotional appeal to help get his point across to the readers.
Overall, Nicholas Carr’s article succeeds in persuading his claim that Google makes people stupid in the article. His whole argument about the Internet has changed the audience way of thinking. He uses rhetorical techniques that are aimed at an audience that will believe him, people like millennials or even an older audience that knew what the internet was like before it was so common.
The article expresses the views of author Rebecca Greenfield, against Noam Chomsky’s beliefs that social media sites such as twitter is destroying the English language. Rebecca goes on to disagree saying that twitter isn’t destroying the English language but in fact is making it better. Furthermore Rebecca uses interviews with linguist and other writers to help better argue her views against Chomsky. I believe that social media has a positive effect on our language and in our culture because, it reaches people faster. Social media sites are little communities, and like communities’ social media users ban together to have “real talk” or serious conversations about what goes on the world.
From the quote above you could clearly tell why women wouldn’t want to say out loud their own opinion, making them oppress their feeling by the use of fear. But I don’t understand how the phrase “Oh, you’re such a girl,” would affect a women that much since they are a girl? After that the blog talks about how comedy is used as a tool for shaming and silencing. “We’re meant to be shamed and silenced by the myth that jokes don’t matter”. From this quote we could tell that the blogger believe that jokes aren’t just used to be funny but also used as a tool to make fun of people as a result cause people to be silenced and shamed.
The ordinary course of this newspaper hath veered off course I’m afraid, in response to the libel and slander many a people hath spread about me I am here to defend my good name! I am Mary Wollstonecraft and I shan’t sit here idle while those who would love to tarnish my good name get away! But what you have gotten right with your shameful sewing circle gossip-talks is that I did write a piece about the president that did have words that would be considered sedition. But what you misconstrued was your contention that I was trying to incite rebellious nature or spread vicious hate against our commander in chief in part as well the government, when in reality that’s furthest from the truth. My whole mission in writing was to point out that
Eleonora Belfiore uses “On Bullshit in cultural Policy Practice and Research: Notes from the British Case”, to tell her audience about the “analysis of bullshit” (Belfiore, 27). The author has several different essays and articles to support her claim of bullshit and one of them is Harry G. Frankfurt’s essay on bullshit. This articles purpose is to display how the cultural policy debate shows little interest in the truth. There is more bullshit compared to lying because people do not want to tell it how it is instead, they will gather a few promising words and bullshit their way out. Bullshitting is in its purest form when it comes to politics as Belfiore states, “The sphere of politics and public life more broadly are usually considered as