The Guardian, a news outlet, published an editorial exposing
the impact of critics on the global warming crisis. The author, whom remains
unknown, outlines the different aspects of the lack of action, and why it must
stop. The implementation of specific statistics, and an anecdote aid the author
in conveying this point. However, the overall delivery of the text detracts
from it. The author begins the text with
an anecdote relaying a hypothetical world-ending situation. Outlining the
historic collaboration and effort that would be mustered into a heroic effort
to save the Earth in an anecdote is purposefully implemented as a comparison.
The author juxtaposes the hypothetical anecdote against the current lack of
action that is reality. Following this with facts and statistics, she leads her
audience to examine the lack of logic in the situation. The statistics are used
as evidence of global warming, and the anecdote is made out to be a
contradiction to what should be done to stop it. The audience, any unsure person or critic, is
then lead to wonder why there have been no efforts to stop it, if all of this
evidence indeed exists. The author then points the blame at the skeptics in the
government, citing specific government officials and their naïve decisions as
proof. However, the presentation of the
argument and devices reveals itself to be the fatal flaw. With the inclusion of
the arguments, the author fails to cite his or her source. Thus, the audience
whom the author intends to sway to his or her side cannot be certain that the
statistics are accurate. Additionally, the exclusion of the author’s identity
contributes to a lack of credibility, therefore dismissing any brilliant use of
rhetoric. While the author would have successfully been able to sway any uncertain
or skeptical person, the lack of credibility distracted from the overall
argument.
 |
| Global Warming http://fabiusmaximus.com/2012/12/10/mother-jones-polar-global-warming-46664/ |
No comments:
Post a Comment