RSS Feed

‘Rhetoric and Civic Life’ Category

  1. FDA Attempts to Rid All Food of Trans-Fat

    November 7, 2013 by Daniel Friedland

    Until a few years ago, no one knew about trans-fat’s existence or its health implications. However, upon realizing the dangers of trans-fat, little was done until 2006, when the F.D.A. passed a law that food corporations had to list any artificial trans-fats on the food label. Since then, trans-fat is commonly known to be extremely bad for one’s health, and it is not as prevalent in many foods as it once was. This article from the New York Times discusses a new F.D.A. ruling that trans-fat is not “safe” to eat. If the ruling is passed, companies that utilize trans-fat would have to scientifically prove that a “certain amount” of trans-fat is safe to consume in order to continue using it as an ingredient.

    The article does a great job of presenting and defending the argument that trans-fat is in fact unsafe through various forms of rhetoric. Right from the get-go, the article mentions the F.D.A.’s new ruling. The Food and Drug Administration is a valid federal agency, so by showing that the F.D.A. supports the argument against trans-fat, the article establishes ethos. Also, the article continually quotes members of the FDA and other related government agencies to further prove the validity of the negative affects of trans-fat.

    In addition to its establishment of ethos, the article also includes numerous logos appeals that directly display trans-fat in a negative light. For example, the following statistic, “the rules could prevent 20,000 heart attacks and 7,000 deaths from heart disease each year,” clearly states that excising trans-fat from our food supply can save thousands of lives and prevent heart disease among the public. This begs the question, “why not eliminate trans-fat entirely?” By making the audience logically conceive of trans-fat in a negative way, the logos appeals used are extremely effective.

    As the article is primarily an informative article, there is little pathos appeal employed. Merely thinking about the health implications of trans-fat consumption brings images of “clogged arteries” to mind. Of course, no one wants to have clogged arteries or heart disease. Therefore, an indirect pathos appeal is employed in that words such as “clogged” and “lurk” cause us to adopt a disgusted feeling towards trans-fat.

    Clearly, this article is not an ordinary piece of rhetoric, as it is a news article that is meant to be unbiased. However, behind the statistics and figures lies a hatred of trans-fat and an agreement that its affects can and SHOULD be remedied through its elimination. This perfectly defended bias emulates throughout the piece of writing.

     

    Works Cited

    Tavernise, Sabrina. “F.D.A. Ruling Would All but Eliminate Trans Fats.” New York Times. (Nov 7, 2013): A1. Web. 7 Nov. 2013.

     

    Article URL: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/08/health/fda-trans-fats.html?_r=0

    Category Rhetoric and Civic Life | Tags: ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, | 2 Comments

  2. Analysis of “We Did Stop” from SNL

    October 18, 2013 by Daniel Friedland

    SNL Parody – We Did Stop

    Although the government shutdown is over, it lasted long enough for some very provocative propaganda to rise to prominence in the media. I witnessed this spectacle while watching Saturday Night Live two weeks ago. Miley Cyrus helps the cast of SNL to make a statement about the inefficiency of the government in a hilarious way. However, even though it seems like a mere parody video, “We Did Stop” contains plenty of rhetoric, as well as civically engages us by indirectly raising questions about the government and its status.

    “We Did Stop” is clearly a parody of Miley Cyrus’ “We Can’t Stop” song and music video, and while making a mockery of the stagnant United States government may be rather insensitive, it serves to bring awareness to a civic issue and place the blame. The video targets the Republican Party, blaming it for the government shutdown. Portraying John Boehner and Michelle Bachmann as manipulative, careless, and ridiculous figures discredits their images. The part towards the end of the video when “Boehner” and “Bachmann” are throwing money at “Uncle Sam” is especially effective because it subtly  introduces the generalization that the Republicans as a whole are rich, selfish, and only care about their own assets (not the state of the government). The video actually diminishes the ethos of the Republican party, which is an underhanded, backwards ethos appeal.

    The video also employs a logos appeal in the form of the lyrics. At the very beginning of the video, the deep voice says “This is our house, we can do what we want . . . vote how we want, defund how we want.” While this line is meant to be humorous and set the stage for the rest of the song, it impacts the viewer in a much more serious way. The line introduces the idea that the Republican party does control the house (of Representatives). They have voted against the budget bill and want to defund Obamacare. Regardless of the manner in which these facts or given, there exists some logical truth to them. They make the viewer of the video believe that the Republican party directly caused the government shutdown by voting against the budget bill and demanding that Obamacare be defunded. These facts are true; however, the makers of the video make it seem like the cause of the government shutdown lies solely in the Republican party, which is certainly a heavily left-leaning bias.

    “We Did Stop” brings awareness to the government shutdown and its supposed cause through the use of humorous, shocking images, as well as cleverly written lyrics. Rhetoric is all around us, even in comedy sketches. Whether or not “We Did Stop” accurately portrays the Republican Party and its role in the government shutdown, it certainly leaves an impression through its intelligent use rhetorical devices.

     

    Video URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ik1bdoufPt0

     

    Works Cited

    We Did Stop – SNL Highlight. 2013. Video. NBC. YouTube, New York, New York. Web. 18 Oct 2013.

    Category Rhetoric and Civic Life | Tags: ,,,,,,,,,,,,, | 3 Comments

  3. Rhetoric and The Pope

    September 20, 2013 by Daniel Friedland

    Since he became the Pope, Pope Francis has set out to change the direction of the Catholic Church. While he plans to maintain the ideals and beliefs that the church has had for years, he plans to be a sort of “forward-thinking” leader of the Catholic faith. An article posted on CNN this morning outlines the new Pope’s stances on certain issues and contains direct quotes from the Pope himself from a recent interview. A big point the Pope is making is that the church must strike a balance between its religious and political objectives. He continuously makes the argument that the church should further separate itself from the political realm when he states, “The people of God want pastors . . . not clergy acting like bureaucrats or government officials. Pope Francis even goes as far as calling himself a sinner, which is true based on the Christian belief that everyone is a sinner; however, it is still odd for the Pope to be so open in that respect.

    Pope Francis has also been criticized for not giving a definitive statement regarding abortion, contraception, and gay marriage, yet he maintains that, “It is not necessary to talk about these issues all the time.” This is certainly a striking comment, as it eludes to the Pope’s aversion to the endless discussion of present-day social issues and his preference to remain devoted to the study of religion. This may sound harsh, but he makes a valid point. The catholic church has its beliefs about things like abortion and pre-marital sex that have been around for years. Merely reiterating these beliefs does not accomplish anything new.

    As for the Pope’s implicit use of rhetoric, he utilizes ethos and logos numerous times. Because Pope Francis embodies the Catholic church and everything it stands for, he must establish ethos in order to maintain his credibility. His manner of speech certainly establishes his ethos because he always speaks honestly and intelligently about matters concerning the church. For example, the Pope states in his interview, “The great leaders of the people of God, like Moses, have always left room for doubt . . . You must leave room for God.” This statement easily solidifies Pope Francis’s position of wisdom and leadership among his people and the public eye, as well.

    Additionally, Pope Francis utilizes logos to back up some of his debated claims. For example, in his assertion that homosexuals should not be discredited or disrespected in any manner, he offers the question, “Tell me. When God looks at a gay person, does he endorse the existence of this person with love, or reject and condemn this person.” He inadvertently answers the question of his personal opinion of homosexuality through his God’s word. Whether or not you believe in a god of some kind, the logic still exists that a gay person is still a person, and thereby, deserves to be treated like one.

    It will certainly be interesting to see if Pope Francis changes the course of Catholicism in a significant way during his papacy.

     

    Works Cited:

    Marrapodi, Eric; Burke, Daniel. “Pope Francis: Church can’t ‘interfere’ with gays.” CNN. N.p. 19, Sept. 2013. Web. 19, Sept. 2013.

    URL:

    http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2013/09/19/pope-francis-church-cant-interfere-with-gays/?hpt=hp_t3

     

    Category Rhetoric and Civic Life | Tags: ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, | 4 Comments

Skip to toolbar