Throughout life, information is constantly being spewed at you. Early on our name and who is in our family is given to us. Later on we are taught to look both ways when we cross the street. Information in what we should eat, how we should dress, and how we should act is spat at us. We pick up on many different mannerisms, speech patterns, and other information that helps to make us who we are. When we are younger we have no idea how to differentiate what information we should take in as a fact or fiction. We believe just about everything our family and friends tell us because why would they want us to be stirred in the wrong direction if they want what is best for us? Well fast forward to present day. Similarly to the past information is still coming at us a mile a minute. Whether it is information coming from home, friends, school, work, or the news we can not help but to take it all in. Like we did in the past, do we just take it all in as truth? Now that we are older and more educated it is our duty to decipher what information we should believe to be true versus what we should believe to be false. In the podcast “The Breaking News Consumer’s Handbook” Brooke Gladstone interviews a correspondent on how the media impacts the people’s beliefs and viewpoints on breaking news, specifically pertaining to the mass shooting at the Washington Navy Yard. The podcast “The Language of Terror” also spoke about how social media tends to spread false information in dramatic events such as the attacks in Paris. Both spoke about how people get caught up in wanting to know and being the first to spread news that they tend o spread false information about events in the news without realizing how harmful that is to the cause. Both podcasts point out that people should do more research, look at more sources, and then retweet or post things pertaining to the event before spreading false information to the public. We should not take everything we see on social media, nor from journalists, as a fact. For all we know they could have heard this from a friend of a friend’s neighbor. Overall, both podcasts wants society as a whole to be more careful of the information it is putting out for the general public to digest.
Rhetorical Analysis: Wells Fargo-Learning Sign Language
Arianna Ferguson
Dr. Teresa Hamilton
Rhetoric and Civic Life
29 June 2016
Rhetorical Analysis Rough Draft
Commercials on TV are made with the intent of grabbing the audience’s attention and focusing our attention to the product on display in a matter of seconds. Commercials can draw our attention with bright moving pictures, mostly empty promises, upbeat music, or relatable mediums. In Wells Fargo’s commercial titled “Learning Sign Language,” two moms-to-be are practicing sign language throughout their daily lives. On the train, in a class, at home, and practically anywhere else the women are preparing. The commercial ends with the moms being introduced to their newly adopted deaf daughter. Immediately the sparks fly when the three begin signing to one another and engage in a lively conversation. The commercial …
The commercial was made obviously to promote the bank Wells Fargo. However, the underlying message of this commercial is that Wells Fargo is welcoming to all. This is regardless of sexual orientation, race, or disability. Even though the ad does not include every aspect of diversity, it was made in an attempt to say “all are welcome.” The first time I ever saw this ad I remember being very shocked at how open they were about the lesbian couple. No, I do not have a problem with LGBT couples, I just was not expecting a well-known company to advertise LGBT people. This made me question why exactly is it so different for me that an LGBT couple would be represented in a commercial just as a heterosexual couple would be. Aside from the moms, when I realized that the two moms were learning how to sign I felt moved by the two -moms selflessness. The moving feeling that overcame me was also caused when I realized the two moms were adopting a young girl. The commercial presented itself in a concise, relatable way, especially to two groups who are often marginalized.
The CEO of Wells Fargo,John Stumpf, frequently spoke on the importance of LGBT inclusiveness. Instead of just speaking about inclusion to his colleagues within the company, he, and fellow advertisement members, made this ad to show that Wells Fargo is for all people of all different backgrounds. Stumpf and his team members took advantage of the kairos and released this ad a month before the Supreme Court ruled in favor of same-sex marriage. The ad effectively displayed two LGBT women without making them seem like anything less than normal. The focus of the commercial was not on the couple being homosexual, however the commercials focus was on the family uniting as one. The message of the commercial rebuts the idea that same sex marriage is not natural nor should same sex couples be allowed to adopt. Those behind the production of the commercial knew that this would cause much controversy, but they also knew it would start a conversation about the issue. The conversation can cause supporters of the bill to continue in their fight to push it into becoming a law.
Wells Fargo explicitly expresses that aside from being beneficial bank, it values diversity and inclusion, ethics, leadership, and what is right for the customers. The company wants to earn its customers trust by behaving in a certain fashion. This is displayed by the company because instead of constantly having people of the same demographic in all of their commercials, they include diverse groups to show that Wells Fargo is for all not for one.
Those who viewed the commercial all had mixed views. The commercial did not include a prelude, therefore whomever was watching the TV viewed the message. The commercial targets disabled people, specifically deaf, or hearing impaired, and LGBT people. Those in both groups, and people who support these groups, valued this commercial since it broke so many barriers. Besides it being the first national bank advertisement to feature an LGBT couple, the advertisement makes those affected feel more accepted in society. The sense of belonging arises between the different communities and allows them to feel more comfortable being who they are in a society that is beginning to accept them. For those who did not agree with the message of the video, they believed that the video was forcing Wells Fargo’s belief on them. Almost immediately, disagreeing customers of Wells Fargo withdrew their accounts and moved their business elsewhere. They were angered and distraught because they felt they were being oppressed and marginalized by a commercial about marginalized people. This just goes to show that a topic this controversial rises an interesting rhetoric among people with different views.
The purpose of this video is to show that Wells Fargo agrees that love is for all and your disabilities should not stop them from being who they are. The commercial shows the company’s dedication to their customers and their support and making them feel welcome. The commercial directly shows the couple and the deaf girl showing their support and encouragement for their lifestyles and disability. Indirectly, Wells Fargo brings the setting of the commercial about in a nonchalant way. Many people still do not see eye to eye with LGBT people, so bringing them into the commercial in a conventional way. Before people could really realize that the couple was lesbian, their daughter is now in the picture. Wells Fargo did this to quickly cloud the viewer’s emotions with feelings of happiness at the sight of the new family signing together. The commercial conveys its message through narration. It depicts a story that almost immediately engrosses the audience.
I believe that the commercial was perfectly timed. The commercial was released around the same time the Supreme Court was passing the law for legalizing same-sex marriage. Right at a pivotal time in history, this commercial raises the morale of LGBT people. The advertisement effectively includes an LGBT couple to raise awareness and to state the company’s support in this battle to win LGBT rights. The advertisement can cause change in the community by causing those who think LGBT people do not deserve certain happiness in life, like adopting a child or being married, to check themselves. They have to realize that their ideological and religious beliefs are for them and for them only. The advertisement can change people’s opinions on this issue. The advertisement also shows that your “disability” is not what makes you. Even though the two mothers had to first teach themselves sign language before adopting their daughter, it was a small bump in the road. However, Wells Fargo did not let the disability hinder the girl from completing daily tasks or sharing a conversation with her moms. It can make people more aware, accepting, and loving towards people of different backgrounds.
I believe that the commercial positively portrays LGBT and hard of hearing, or deaf, people. The commercial allows them to be accurately represented by people who are actually like them rather than just actors. The commercial shows that Wells Fargo stands in solidarity with these marginalized groups. With including marginalized groups, TV shows and commercials often follow stereotypes or use the people for market only. However, Wells Fargo seemed to have actually cared about its audience and how they would perceive the message. They did not make the sexuality nor deafness of the actors the main focus. Rather, they made the bonding and laughter shared between the parties and that love is love regardless of orientation or disability. Many other companies should follow suit as to what Wells Fargo did, however many still feel uncomfortable expressing their opinions on these controversial issues. Wells Fargo lives by their slogan that “Together we can go far” in the sense that the moms and daughter are better and stronger together and that their love is just as strong as any other love.
Works Cited
https://www.wellsfargo.com/about/corporate/vision-and-values/our-values/
Civil Artifact
On Friday, June 26, 2015 the Supreme Court made a ruling that impacted not only the United States significantly, but also nations worldwide. The Supreme Court decided that it is unconstitutional to deny same-sex couples their right to marry. For years it has been acceptable to deny same-sex couples of this right to marry. Reasons include not being able to provide a stable home for children or for religious reasons. With the ruling came the hashtag #LoveWins. I believe that this is an important artifact because I believe that this was a pivotal moment, especially in the United States. The hashtag traveled from social
media site t
o site. It made its way from twitter, to snapchat, to facebook, and to instagram making the ruling known to everyone of all ages nationwide. The #LoveWIns hashtag can lead to a heated debate depending on who you are with. Some challenges that the artifact might pose is the question of people’s religious values and should this be mandated nationwide?
Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis. Lou Gehrig’s Disease. ALS. All names describing a detrimental muscle disease that causes the death of neurons that control voluntary muscles. The disease first made its debut to the public when famouse baseball player Lou Gehrig died of the disease. More recently, awareness of the disease has peaked again in July of 2014. The Ice Bucket Challenge serves as a civil artifact pertaining to this disease 
and its impact. The Ice Bucket Challenge was originated by Pete Frates who was diagnosed with ALS in March of 2012. The Ice Bucket Challenge serves as a civil artificat because it made its rounds through the news as celebrities and everyday people participated in it. Everyone involved wanted to have their part in raising awareness and participating in the phenomenon that changed and helped so many people’s lives.
The Confederate Flag. Some few ignorant people may see the flag as “Southern Pride” while to most the flag represents racism, the KKK, and treason. Many who still proudly carry the flag and have it flying from their cars still claim that it is a form of “Southern Pride.” Some questions that arise with that statement are “What exactly is the South proud of that the flag symbolizes?”, “What is your standpoint on the flag?”, and “Should the flag be banned?” For those who have strong lineage in the confederacy, and for whatever reason are proud of that heritage, should know that the confederate is wrongly believed to be the national flag of the Confederate States. I believe that the flag would be an interesting topic for a civic artifact, even with the controversy. I think that instead of basing your Southern pride into something as controversial as the flag, one should do it instead on southern hospitality or even their sweet tea. This flag serves as a civil artifact because it causes much debate on an issue that widely affects just about everyone.