Could you imagine what it would be like if you go to your little cousin’s birthday party, and he or she get upset because there were no balloons? If legislators ban balloons, this imagination could become reality. There is a controversial topic going around that asks if it would be best if balloons were banned in the United States. This controversy was discussed in a video, “California Aims to Ban Metallic Balloons to Reduce Power Outages,” the editorial, “Parties Can Be Fun Without Balloons,” by Natalie Romero, and the other editorial, “Balloons Bring Joy to Millions,” by Theo Lewis. While there were similarities among the sources, there were also many differences as well. All three sources share the similarity of supporting their argument …show more content…
The first difference between all three sources is that the video is unbiased, while the two editorials are biased according to their claim. In the editorial by Theo Lewis, he uses evidence to only support his side, and gave many reasons why balloons shouldn’t be banned. Natalie Romero gave reasons to only support why balloons should be banned. However, in the video, the anchorwoman says, “Eyewitness news reporter, Jovana Lara, is live at Hawthorne with both sides of the controversy.” This statement shows that the video expresses both sides of the debating controversy, balloons should be banned, and balloons shouldn’t be banned. One other reason that supports that all sources are different is the fact that the editorial, “Balloons Bring Joy to Millions,” by Theo Lewis, has a stronger argument than the other editorial by Natalie Romero. In Theo Lewis’ argument, he uses strong evidence, one being him quoting experts opinions. He says, “‘Balloons bring people so much joy,’ says Flynn. ‘There aren’t a lot of dangers. When they are properly handled, they are very safe.’” This evidence is a quote from a “balloon expert,” and he is basically saying that although balloons aren’t even dangerous, if they do become a problem, properly handled, they are safe. This example of ethos give Theo Lewis more credibility, being the one whom got an expert opinion to support his reasoning. Theo also quotes Dan Flynn, the expert, another time in his argument. “‘There is little evidence to support claims of the danger that balloons pose to marine animals,’ says Dan Flynn, chairman of the Balloon Council, an organization of balloon makers and sellers.” This piece of evidence also gives credibility to Theo Lewis. It supports the fact that claims of danger toward marine animals because of balloons is simply an excuse, and there are few
By including the source from which he derived these statistics, Gilbert could create a more trustworthy evidence and help convince the audience. As the argument progresses, the author uses articles from the New York Times as well as another Daily Beast article when discussing the background of the topic. These evidences are not very authoritative because they come from articles that might have bias. Both the New York Times, and the Daily Beast can be opinionated, so taking sources from less biased and more firsthand sources would be more reliable. The author also employs quotes from the protestors to support his opinion.
This article definitely supports the first secondary source because both denounce the U.S. government and criticize the lack of support for the
The last two articles are primary sources from Andrew
Things Are Different Now It is interesting to see that hilarious videos could pass on more information than expected. Although the people passing the message across seem to lack ethical appeal, it was really informative. The analysis of the three videos clearly reveals that ethos, logos and pathos were all used to pass the message across.
To begin with, Alana Semuels expresses an ideal amount of credibility in her article. She
The two arguments have many similarities, especially in the foundation
It also implies to the reader that Heath spent extra time crafting a powerful article using logos, which demonstrates the author's passion for the advantages of funny animal videos. Using both of these strategies of rhetorical appeals complements each other in creating a more powerful
Ms. Steinem objective towards writing this article was the show her audience how far women have come in terms of having a say in what they would like to see in magazine geared towards woman. This article language was anything but biased. Because Ms. Steinem provided within her article how this situation wouldn’t be exclusive to only women. Let’s put in postion a youth who is thought to know nothing but what the media provide him/her. One the contrary, the youth’s will turn to materials that interest them.
In the past ten years, he said, the volume of mail has noticeable decreased, even though the circulation of his magazine has risen.” This means that many people do not say what they believe is true and give their own opinion towards something believe needs to be fixed. This is similar to the essay “The Boston Photographs” because the newspaper company who revealed the tragic photos defended the woman, and some people mocked the woman. Another comparison is in “The Singer Solution to World Poverty”, on page 381 it states, “Now you, too have the information you need to save a child’s life. How should you judge yourself if you don’t do it?
Instead, it states the opinions of both parties while posing a series of questions. Within the article, questions such as “Should schools arm teachers and guards?” are asked and responded to from both a left wing and right wing perspective. The left wing response to this question brought up how an Oregon community college that just had a shooting massacre wasn’t a gun free zone; students and staff were allowed to conceal and carry a firearm, none of which stopped the shooting. This argument also brings up how costly training all staff at schools would be, which is why it should not be implemented. The right-wing response uses sources from the NASRO postulating that if staff were armed in schools, students would be able to feel much safer.
This video can be easily interpreted by anyone and the message that "guns are bad and we need to do something to stop it," will come across very clearly. Another quote was "Propaganda does not deceive people; it merely helps them to deceive themselves," by Eric Hoffer. This video indeed provided evidence against guns, but it can't be taken to the extent that no guns should be allowed anywhere by any reasonable person. However, if a person was looking for evidence to ban guns outright, they could use this video and manage to convince themselves and others that guns should be banned. It would be more convincing with the emotions that would be evoked through this situation and the
Well she was right, our society has no backbone and they can't stomach the truth. The article “ P is for poison”mentions how people in our world are giving up self worth and being censored by the government. From the book previously mentioned, Beatty ( the head firefighter) gives a little speech that mentions how the government is censoring what people can do or say to not “ step on the toes” of society. The article also hits these topics. People aren’t aloud to have “forbidden thoughts” and these thought aren’t aloud to be even
The fact that Gonchar remains unbiased helps strengthen his reasoning and build reliability by showing readers that he fully intends to show both sides and allows the audience to decide what is correct. By using two different examples with explanation after each one, the article flows freely and is easier to
In the source used, Thomas Hayden’s (2002) article, “Trashing the Oceans”, the ethos argument is persuasive in its wording because of its easy to understand, inviting nature and relatability, while still informing the reader about the disturbing information coming from the accounts of a research vessel that goes by the title Alguita, a vessel that has been studying the oceanic garbage since 1999. This article has already displayed all three arguments of logos, pathos and ethos in just a few paragraphs. The compared article, written by John H. Tibbetts “Managing Marine Plastic Pollution” does not do this. An example of the ethos attributes of “Trashing the Oceans” is the introduction pertaining to Taco bell.
Recently, there is a new invention that has become public interest from country’s leader to citizen due to the rise of one device that called e-cigarettes. E-cigarettes or Vape are electronic devices intended to deliver nicotine with flavorings, which up to 7700 different flavors and some other chemicals into vapor. The amount of users of this device has increased in the past couple of years, which contributed $6 billion to the economy in 2015 itself, this is so as it is often portrayed as a healthier substitute for the regular cigarettes though this statement has yet been proven true. The question is: should the government ban the use of e-cigarettes? In my opinion, government should ban the use of e-cigarettes because it is detrimental to health,