Trump and the Ukraine

In America, tensions are high due to a political scandal involving President Donald Trump and President Zelenskyy of the Ukraine.  

 

On the morning of July 25th, 2019, the two Presidents conversed through what at first seemed like a relatively insignificant phone call. After an initial exchange of pleasantries, President Trump brought up the substantial amount of aid and support that the United States is proving to the Ukraine.  

 

This part of the conversation is significant because a week prior to the call, on July 18th, an official from the Office of Management and Budget informed Departments and Agencies that earlier that month Trump issued instructions to suspend all security assistance to the Ukraine. Thus, the implied message of Trump discussing the aid America gives the Ukraine is as follows: if you would like to continue to receive this aid you will do me the following favor. 

 

Trump then went on to ask Zelenskyy to look into events that went on in Ukraine – potentially referring to the reports of alleged interference in the 2016 United States Presidential Election – and to investigate members of the Biden family.  

 

In late March of this year, a series of articles were published in The Hill where several Ukrainian officials made a series of allegations. One such allegation was that in 2016, former Vice President Joe Biden pressured the now former President of the Ukraine, Petro Poroshenko, to fire a Ukrainian prosecutor who was looking into a Ukrainian energy company that Hunter Biden, Joe’s son, sat on the board for. 

 

Joe Biden is one of Trump’s main domestic rivals in the upcoming 2020 Presidential Election, so by asking the Ukrainian President to look into Biden’s potentially illegal activity, Trump is being accused of attempting to interfere with the upcoming election.  

 

Following the conclusion of the phone call, many White House officials worried that they had witnessed the President abusing his power for personal gain. They then took the initiative to intervene and “lock down” all records of the call. The records were placed into a separate electronic system that is used to store classified information of an especially sensitive nature. Many saw this as an abuse of the records system because the call did not contain any information even remotely sensitive from a national security perspective. 

 

When the Inspector General received the Whistle-Blower Complaint letter which detailed the aforementioned phone call and the activity surrounding it, he launched a preliminary investigation. The results of the investigation deemed the Complaint letter both urgent and credible. 

 

What will be the result of this political scandal? 

 

Many democrats are using this as the basis for their efforts to impeach Donald Trump. The majority of Republicans are standing by the President, with the notable exception of Utah Senator, Mitt Romney. As the story continues to unfold, it will be interesting to see what the consequences will be. 

 

 

Note: All information used in the creation of this article was found in section “A” of the September 27th, 2019 edition of The New York Times, and from the transcript of the phone call between Trump and Zelenskyy. 

Straws

This artifact emerged in response to the straw movement. Many states and companies are implementing bans on plastic straws because they cannot be recycled and are often mistaken as food by marine life. Straws get stuck in sea turtles and other animals, causing some to die of asphyxiation. 

 

The design of this civic artifact first emerged on the site Red Bubble but has since spread as a symbol of the movement. 

 

According to an employee from Oceans Without Boarders, “Over the last 10 years, we have produced more plastic than in the whole of the last century, and 50 percent of the plastic we use is single-use and is immediately thrown away. One million seabirds and 100,000 marine mammals are killed annually from plastic in our oceans. Forty-four percent of all seabird species, 22 percent of whales and dolphins, all sea turtle species, and a growing list of fish species have been documented with plastic in or around their bodies.” 

 

You might be wondering, why focus on straws out of all the forms of plastic sent to our oceans? 

 

Due to straws lightweight nature they cannot be recycled. They are also a single-use product which is causing an increase in waste sent to the oceans. Additionally, they are a product that able-bodied people can easily go without.  

 

Straws may only account for approximately .025% of the 8 million tons of plastic that flows into our oceans each year, but they are a symbol for people to rally around to eventually eliminate all single-use plastics. 

 

And it’s working. 

 

Look around the room right now. How many reusable water bottles do you see on people’s desks compared to single-use plastic water bottles? 

 

Bans on straws and other single-use plastics are being implemented by a growing amount of states and companies. People are becoming more aware of the harmful impact that single-use plastics have and are making efforts to curb their consumption of them by purchasing reusable straws, water bottles, bags, and silverware. People are also making efforts to curb the consumption of others through advocating for these bans through art like this. 

 

This artifact utilizes pathos to play on people’s sympathy towards sea turtles and other forms of marine life, while also connecting straws to a well-known movie that incited a fear of the ocean into generations.  

 

Talk to anyone about the movie Jaws and they will immediately tell you how long it took them to go back into the water after seeing this iconic movie. The image above plays on the fear associated with the movie and brings it towards single-use plastics. In 2018, only 66 provoked shark attacks were reported worldwide, but compare that to the thousands of deaths of marine life due to plastic each year. 

 

The artifact conveys the message that it is humans, not marine life, that is the real threat. 

 

The artifact also used the rhetorical device of kairos by emerging at a time when environmental issues are beginning to be taken seriously. People are becoming increasingly aware of our impact on the Earth. This artifact was created at a time where it would be taken the most seriously, and thus when it would have the greatest impact.  

 

Since this artifact emerged at a time when it would be well received, it is able to draw people’s attention to the harmful effects of single-use plastics. The variation of an iconic movie poster is attention grabbing and connects the issue of single-use plastics to a terrifying threat to society. It also plays on people’s sympathy towards innocent marine life such as the sea turtle pictured. The combination of all of these elements makes this image an effective civic artifact. 

Don’t Let Criminals Harm More Innocent Victims – An Emotional Appeal

Dogs are one of the most common household pets. Many of us grew up with them, and consequently have formed strong attachments to the animal. Even if you did not personally own a dog growing up, you likely have experienced a positive interaction with them in passing or at a friend’s house.  

  

This advertisement channels the strong emotional connection many of us have towards dogs in order to elicit a response to further their cause. This rhetorical device is called pathos. 

  

In The Essential Guide to Rhetoric pathos is defined as 

“the emotional state of the audience, as produced by the speaker or speech,” (Keith W., Lundberg C., 42) 

  

This rhetorical device is commonly used in situations where the audience is familiar with, and has strong emotional connections to, the subject. For this device to be effective, the speaker must align the audience’s emotions with their argument.

  

In the example above, ASPCA is counting on its audience’s familiarity with, and positive connection to, dogs. They then exploit this connection by showing an image of a dog who has been chained up and presumably undergone additional forms of abuse. Since the audience cares so strongly about dogs, they will be compelled to rescue this dog, and others like it, for the advertised price of only 60 cents a day. 

  

The advertisement adds a time pressure to their message to convey a sense of urgency. Every 60 seconds a dog is abused. Thus, one could draw the conclusion that every minute you waste before signing up to make a continual donation to their foundation allows another dog to be abused. 

  

If you care about dogs, this urgent call to action coupled with the emotional appeal should convince you to donate, but in case you still need more convincing the advertisement goes one step further by conveying a greater importance to the message: not only are the dogs being abused, but their lives are at stake. 

  

This idea of dogs being murdered creates an even stronger emotional appeal that can be applied to a wider audience. Maybe you don’t feel a strong emotional connection to dogs, but we’ve been raised to be appalled by the murder of innocent beings. 

 

Without the use of pathos, this message would not be nearly as convincing. By drawing on its audience’s emotions, ASPCA connects the audience to their argument. This may not always be the best rhetorical appeal to use, but in this situation, it creates a strong and powerful message. After all, who could say no to helping that poor dog?