Does Congress Matter? John Murtha's airport is dumb.

In Glenn Beck's article “Does Congress Matter?,” he commits some logical fallacies. The first one is oversimplification which is seen throughout the entire report. Beck “reduces complex issues to a simple argument” (Writing and Rhetoric 79). Questioning whether congress matters or not is a broad and complex issue that Beck oversimplifies down to a plea for 56 “re-founders” (par. 5). He basically skips over a discussion of the actual question posed and rambles on about John Murtha's airport (par. 6-10). Glenn Beck's quick banter gets readers and listeners riled up about things that are beyond the question at hand. This is direct result of Beck's oversimplification. Another fallacy committed in the article is that of guilt by association. As Meggie discusses in her analysis, “Beck assumes that all of congress and politics are corrupt. He doesn't give the reader or listener a chance to even think that maybe Congress isn't all completely corrupt” (Meggie Savage). This leads to hasty, sweeping generalities being made. Beck's generalization of the character of all Congress members doesn't allow any wiggle room for those in Congress who may be different. He says he wants “56 brave men and women...to stand up to the corruption and the special interests in [their] own party, [to] stand up to what Washington, D.C. has become” (par. 5). Here he infers that all of Washington needs reform and also that people aren't already standing up to the “corruption and special interests” of their respective parties (par. 5).

Yes, Glenn Beck is quit-witted and smart and maybe has some good ideas, but audiences always need to be aware of the tactics, such as logical fallacies, used to persuade them. The logical fallacies he commits are important to understand so readers don't get swept up along with his generalizations or caught up in his oversimplifications and ramblings about airports.

We are "the Children of 9/11"

Peggy Noonan's article called “The Children of 9/11 Grow Up” is a well-written discussion of how the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 shaped the lives of those who were children at the time. She uses pathos beautifully and is very aware of her audience. This article, written for The Wall Street Journal, appeals to both college students and their older parents or grandparents, along with everyone in between.

First of all, Noonan captures those who were ten or twelve on 9/11 who are now college students. She describes this audience as being “old enough to understand that something dreadful had happened but young enough still to be in childhood” on 9/11 (par.2). This group of people, which includes myself, are drawn in by her early comments and the title. We are “the children of 9/11.” As Noonan describes the events of the day and quotes students she has talked to, we all find ourselves nodding our heads and remembering back to the “first moment of historical consciousness” in our lives (par.4). It happened just like she described it. People that were children back in 2001 will read it because they are interested to see what other people their age are saying. Noonan pulls readers in because she knows her audience would be interested to see her thoughts on how 9/11 affected them growing up.

However, Noonan is also interested in the readers her age. The people who can remember November 22, 1963 make up a large part of the readership of the Journal. She invites this audience to read as she draws parallels between JFK's assassination and the attacks of 9/11. The situtations were quite similar: the “hushed tones”, the teachers sobbing, the “shocked parents”, and how “everyone went home and watched TV all day, and the next” (par. 6). This article will help people understand how the events of 9/11 largely affected the children at the time.

By paying attention to her multiple audiences, Peggy Noonan is able to reach out to her readers. She captures their attention and intrigues them. Throughout the article, she remembers her intended audience and realizes what do they already know. Noonan wrote this to be inclusive and to reach all potential readers

Noonan, Peggy. "The Children of 9/11 Grow Up." Wall Street Journal (2009). The Wall Street Journal.

12 Sept. 2009. Web. 13 Oct. 2009. .

The Confidence of a Great Leader

There have been many great leaders of America that have used all of the powers of ethos to make the American people love them. President Franklin Delano Roosevelt was one of these great leaders. One example of when President roosevelt used his ethos to present an issue was on December 8, 1941. President Roosevelt was addressing many important members of the government and the American people about the Pearl Harbor attack that had happened just the day before.

President Roosevelt already had almost 'built-in' ethos just from being the President. As so, he held the highest position of authority in the country. He was able to influence many people because they respected and honored his words.

Roosevelt cuts right to the chase and begins addressing how there had been "no threat or hint of war or of armed attack." (par.4) Many people were shocked at how the Japanese had been able to sneak behind the back of the U.S. President Roosevelt begins to speak as if he is just a regular citizen who is just as shocked as everyone else. He appeals to people and their emotions because it indeed was a tragic day. He shows sincere emotion and speaks with profound clairy when he says, " I regret to tell you that many American lives have been lost." (par.6) He is very truthful with the audience and this gives him even more credibility then he already has. This is also a very smart way to involve pathos, by appealing to the citizens emotions of shock and fear.

The President then uses an interesting tactic. He uses repition to address the places where Japan had attacked the United States. (par.6) By doing this, he over emphasizes how real and detrimental the situation is. It arouses a sense of fear in the audience when they begin to realize all of the damage that the Japaneses empire has caused in such short time.

However, right after the bold statements, the President uses ethos to reassure his nation, as noted by Madeline in her analysis in the fourth paragraph. He begins by stating, "As commander in chief of the Army and Navy, I have directed that all measures be take for our defense." (par.8) Not only is he the President of the country, but he restates his position as commander of the armed forces. He speaks with courage and confidence when he says, "the American people in their righteous might will win through absolute victory." (par.9) He shows that he has determination to protect the American people. He uses his authority to publicly display his determination in a time of severe crisis. He continutes with his wave of confidence by stating, "with confidence in our armed forces, with the unbounding determination of our people, we will gain inevitable triumph."(par.12) He shows the people and the members of Congress and Senate that he plans on protecting and defending the country's rights by any means.

President Roosevelt uses ethos in the form of confidence and courage to his great advantage in his speech. He also relates to the american people by saying 'we' instead of 'I'. Some of the ethos used is to boost the confidence of the United States, and is strictly for the people. His sheer conviction regarding the issue and the confidence he shows makes the people want to support him and give their support to whatever he may ask of them. President Roosevelt gains the trust and support of the American people by the way he presents the issue with such authority and formality.

“If we don’t come together...we, too, will be destroyed”

In the movie “Remember the Titans”, Coach Boone takes his segregated football team for a run in the middle of the night while they are up at camp. They run through all sorts of trees and rivers until it is morning when they stop.

Coach Boone tells them that they are standing where the Battle of Gettysburg was fought. He then goes on to deliver a profound speech. He uses strong imagery, refers to an event that is a part of their lives, and appeals to their emotions all in an effort to encourage his team to come together, respect each other, and play the “game like men”. Coach Boone really gets his players’ attention and is able to reach out to them through using a huge part of their heritage and what they know. He takes them to Gettysburg where history happened. They all live in Virginia and are very aware of the Civil War and how segregation is a part of their lives. This is all happening in a time when prejudice and hatred between blacks and whites was at one of its heights. He starts his speech out talking about the battle and how men died right there “fighting the same fight that [they’re] still fighting amongst [themselves]”. Coach Boone points out that the battle hasn’t ended, that the terrible hatred and fighting is still happening, that they are still fighting their own Battle of Gettysburg. The players have all seen this but Coach Boone puts it in a way that really makes them think and realize how terrible it is. He asks them to take a lesson from the dead. He refers back to the battle again when he says, “If we don't come together, right now, on this hallowed ground, then we, too, will be destroyed. Just like they were.”

When talking about the battle, Coach Boone uses the rhetorical strategy of strong imagery to captivate his audience and really get them to picture the scene. He describes all the colors and how the battle really happened when he says, “This green field right here was painted red. Bubbling with the blood of young boys. Smoke and hot lead pouring right through their bodies.” Everyone there must have been able to clearly visualize what it was like, how the field was soaked with blood. He describes how horrible the fighting really was when he talks about the “smoke and hot lead pouring right through” the bodies of the soldiers. Coach Boone uses this to draw the connection between present day and the past. He is able to say that they are still fighting the same way, that there is figurative, and literal, smoke and hot lead pouring through their bodies.

All this is for an appeal to their emotion. The reference to the Battle of Gettysburg becomes the basis of his speech. It brings with it heavy emotional baggage and feelings, some tender and some of intense hatred. Before the speech, the white and black players were constantly going up against each other and tensions ran high. But in Coach Boone’s speech he recognizes this and compares it to the tension felt on the field at Gettysburg. The boys are all able to relate to this and recognize the truth in their coach’s words.

So with the speech, their coach is able to inspire them to work together and resolve this century-long issue within the team. Afterwards, the team takes steady steps to becoming unified and they are eventually able to overcome their past issues and historical tensions. Coach Boone’s words of emotion, imagery, and familiar ideas put in a new perspective really affect the boys. He is able to help spur on a huge change that affected a whole town and made a very big difference in many people’s lives.

Stale Beer: A Not-So-Sober Crowd

As a citizen from Bountiful, Utah, I frequently read the local newspaper, "The Davis County Clipper." Over the summer, when JoAnn Hamilton reintroduced the liquor law issue in an attempt to campaign against Mayor Joe Johnson, I became extremely interested: I was raised in the neighborhood of both Mayor Joe and Sister Hamilton. As a member of the audience to whom JoAnn Hamilton wrote, I am now a better educated community member; through studying rhetorical techniques I have been able to recognize the manner in which argumentation and persuasion has a personal effect on my life.

First and foremost, it is clear to whom JoAnn Hamilton was writing: a nearly homogeneous, LDS, family-oriented population. Throughout her letter to the editor, Hamilton repeatedly refers to a "child-appropriate resolution," or "an ordinance to protect children" (par. 2, 3). Appealing to the majority of her audience, as was mentioned in a previous blog post on pathos, Hamilton creates a situation in which those who don't agree with her suddenly become in the wrong: i.e. if you don't agree with me, then you must not want to protect children. In this manner, many people, convinced that the mention of the words "beer" and "children" in the same sentence is the recipe for juvenile delinquents, sided with Hamilton at the time of the liquor law issue.

The question arises, however, concerning about the "other" members of Hamilton's audience. What was their response? The answer is found in her biased reporting of their actions against her: they threw beer cans all over her lawn after she complained about them (par. 13). Seemingly, because of Hamilton's presentation of her opinion, a lack of tolerance became evident in members of both parties. Though I do not drink beer, I know people who do. It is understandable to me, therefore, as to why the mayor supported the interests of the minority of Hamilton's audience. By having an attitude of tolerance, Mayor Johnson gained the support of many community members, both those who do and do not consume alcoholic beverages.

With that said, the liquor law ruckus occurred over two years ago. In reviving the issue, Hamilton seemed to expect that her audience of LDS, child-protecting citizens, would once again agree with her; however, in reading responses to her recent letter to the editor, Hamilton's audience seems to have changed. Because both Hamilton and Mayor Johnson are members of my neighborhood, I have been able to see on a personal level the way a mostly homogeneous community can be polarized on an issue. For example, children of both Johnson and Hamilton joined the fray, as well as other neighbors. Even Sheryl Allen, a representative for the Utah State Legislature, expressed her opinion concerning Hamilton's letter. Near the time of the primary election, it was interesting to see who had the campaign signs lining the lawns in support of Mayor Joe versus those with signs for Jeff Novak. I was able to both see and hear different responses and opinions expressed by numerous people whom I look up to and respect. In this manner, I had a personal application for audience analysis. It became obvious to me that an audience, no matter how similar their background, will always having varying responses to an argument.

Though several months after the publication of Hamilton's letter, there are still several weeks until the mayoral election. Interestingly, Mayor Joe leads the polls, indicating a clear and decisive victory. Hamilton, in censuring Johnson, seems to have given him the election by eliciting support from a variety of citizens, including those who once supported her stance on the liquor law issue. Thus, in addressing an audience, a number of factors become important in attempting to create an effective and persuasive argument. As is seen with JoAnn Hamilton's letter to the editor, one must be careful: an audience may react differently than expected as a result of the presentation of an issue.

Stale Beer: An Emotional Appeal

When people care about or have concern for a topic, they generally feel very strongly about their opinion. Their arguments, in an attempt to sway others' beliefs, are often filled with emotion. An example of this is found in the article referenced by the Stale Beer blog post. In this untimely letter to the editor, there are many examples of emotional appeals, as seen in the passionate language used by the author. Although written and published too late to be effective when considering the kairos of an issue, JoAnn Hamilton, in using pathos, also known as emotional appeals intent on influencing readers, is still able to present a persuasive argument.

The most important manner in which Hamilton creates an emotionally appealing argument is by using concrete examples. With vivid imagery and personal experiences, Hamilton creates a connection with readers. Her appeal concerning the unfair treatment she and others received while dealing with the Bountiful City Council is able to take on a more realistic and personal light for readers who may otherwise be apathetic. As she describes such experiences as being "a lady in a wheelchair, sitting on her front lawn surrounded by beer cans," it becomes easier to sympathize with her opinion (par. 14). Hamilton also appeals to the values of her audience, a predominately LDS community, as she describes the mayor use of profanity when talking about her (par. 12). By revealing such details, community members are able to picture the situation, creating their own, emotionally-charged, version of her experience. With such personal examples, Hamilton's letter becomes emotionally appealing to those with similar values.

Hamilton's word choice also contributes to the pathos of her letter to the Davis County Clipper. Her diction immediately conveys her anger and dissatisfaction for Mayor Johnson and the Bountiful City Council. In describing the liquor laws as a "beer variance" or "beer license," Hamilton creates a negative connotation by using a more base description of the city ordinance (par. 2, 6). Conversely, Hamilton repeatedly brings up the phrase "the ordinance to protect children," and "a child-appropriate resolution," so-called god terms which gain a positive association because they are related to family values (par. 2, 3). With these and other such emotional overtones found in the diction of her argument, Hamilton is further able to persuade her audience.

Hamilton's syntax is also significant when considering the use of pathos in her letter. She begins her argument by saying, "I have known Mayor Joe Johnson and John Marcus Knight for years and like them," and then proceeds to censure them in an extremely critical manner (par. 1). As a letter that was written to garner support against the incumbent in the mayoral election, it is interesting that Hamilton would spend the opening paragraphs of her letter criticizing members of the city council. Granted, the mayor and city council work together on many issues, but the manner in which Hamilton introduces her complaint against the mayor seems to spend more time on criticizing the dealings between the city government and liquor-serving restaurants. Focusing on past issues to heighten emotional arousal, it is not until the final paragraph of her argument that Hamilton mentions the name of her candidate, Jeff Novak. In this manner, however, her letter seems anticlimactic. Hamilton, although successful in heightening emotions in support of protecting children against alcohol and in criticizing the current mayor, does not make a compelling argument for Jeff Novak. One possible reason for diminished emotional support at the end of Hamilton's letter is weakened logos: she does not fully explain a logical connection for how Novak would change city functions. As a result of this lack of logos, Hamilton loses pathos and emotional appeal for her argument.

In reading Hamilton's argument, it becomes evident that emotional appeals, no matter how strong and persuasive, are only effective when used in conjunction with the remaining corners of the rhetoric triangle, ethos and logos. Hamilton, in using effective pathos in some aspects of her article, most notably her personal examples and word choice, is able to make a persuasive argument; her appeal, however, is limited to those who think passionately with their hearts, rather than critically with their minds.

Beauty for All

It is highly unlikely that one has watched television or read a magazine without seeing a Proactiv Solution advertisement. Their commercials have become so popular due to their promised guarantee, that they are virtually everywhere.

I did not really notice that ProActiv focuses primarily on Caucasians until I read Ben's analysis. Most, if not all of the women and men on their website, commercials and magazine articles are Caucasias. It is true that 'the average white does have a higher income than African-Americans or Hispanics.' (par.3) This is so proved in an article called "Race and Income", which states that, "White incomes have risen a bit, on average, while incomes for black and Hispanic families have declined." (par.2) So, by appealing to the more wealthy, they hope to draw in more money. It is unclear as to if the company is trying to say that white people are more beautiful than the other races or not. Some people may take offense to the fact that there are primarily whites on the advertisements and commercials. In looking up other articles I came across one that noted P. Diddy and the Williams sisters. That is the first time I have seen African Americans mentioned in a ProActiv advertisement. It is true that even though they hardly do it, when they do, they mention famous athletes and musical artists to draw in the crowd.

It is true that the site is primarily focused on women in their late teens and older. They have gotten gorgeous actresses, dancers and other Hollywood starts to promote their products. The Proactiv company has ingeniously used these not only attractive, but rich and famous, people to promote their products. Many women become tricked by this and think that if they use Proactiv, they too will become beautiful like the beautiful women who endorse it. These stars also always look precisely immaculate in the commercials, leading consumers to believe they will be happy and immaculate too with the use of these products. As silly as it sounds, it works. Most women are so concerned about their looks that they will do anything to become more beautiful than the next girl. These women will also usually go to any cost, however extreme, to make beauty happen for them. Proactiv can charge whatever they want because they target the female audience so well with their endorsers. It is an ingenious tactic and other companies should learn from their example.


Proactiv located their two main target consumers and used tactics to persuade and draw them in to purchasing their products. The company was obviously very smart in determining the audience they would show their products to. Being aware of the audience can help to make writing or advertisements more successful.