When advertisers make an ad, they want to sell something that is (usually) bad. They would just put a scenario about what their product is “helpful” in helping them. They try to put the fun things out in the open rather than the bad ones. For example, if a company were selling alcohol, they would put posters, commercials about how it makes you look cool and gets you the hot chick. But, they don’t tell you the harm it does to your body or the results in the morning. They also make a big jump about getting the hot chick because this is not a guaranteed thing, but it still catches the attention of males that drinking would get you laid. I don’t think it will get you laid. So companies want to sell their product and they don’t care about the people, but what if someone makes a commercial that helps people rethink their situation (from bad to good). In this ad, they talk about anti-smoking. It uses the opposite of ethos, uses pathos, and opposite of logos. They still use some of the elements that others use to sell their product, but they use it to help people rethink about smoking.
The ad uses children to get a point to the adults and teens on the commercial (they used real people) and the audience, which is us that are watching, that smoking is not healthy. This ad shows that the commonplace for smoking, in today’s time, is ok for teenagers to smoke and they jump to an assumption that they make it seem that little kids are starting to try it. Ethos fall into this because the children are the status or appealing people tat the audience are seeing and start to wonder if kids really are starting to smoke at a young age. When the kids ask for a lighter, pathos gets involved as the people tell the kids if they are being serious and they refuse to give them one. They tell them that it’s bad for you because you can die from it and trying to scare the kids so they wouldn’t do it.
When the people state the facts about how bad smoking is and what disgusting things are in it, they start to care about the kids because they don’t want them to be sick from smoking. They bring more of pathos to here because it catches the audience attention on the health of the kids. Then when the people smoking are stating logic, logos; why do they keep doing it? They know the facts and what it can do to one and what it contains. Do they know what they are saying? I mean are they listening to themselves because it seems like they don’t care about themselves.
When they finish talking to the children, the children hands them a paper and leave. You can tell here that the kids did not want to smoke but see if they know the facts of smoking. The message the children gave them says, “ You worry about me. But why not about yourself? Reminding yourself is the most effective warning to help you quit. Call 1800 hotline to quit smoking.” This makes you think to why do people smoke. The smokers were shocked to read it, but none of them threw away the brochures. They knew the logic thing to do. What got me to think was that children do what they see and when they see that teenagers start to smoke, its ok for them to start young. This reminded people that they could influence everyone to start smoking and influence the children.
We know that smoking is bad and what ingredients they put in a cigarette, but why do people still do it. I see that logos are an example here because when someone buys the cigarettes; they think its cool or the thing to do now a day. This ad helped people realize that they never stopped and thought about themselves. It was helping them to get help to quit. Adding rhetoric elements doesn’t mean it is for selling things to other without any care for them, but it can be used to help save people from mistakes they choose.
1. Identify the writer’s main claim about the rhetoric, ideology or and subtext of the piece.
Commercial uses the opposite of appeals to ethos and logos, and also pathos to convince viewers to stop smoking.
2. Identify and comment on the writer’s introduction of a context (rhetorical situation) for this piece of rhetoric (think of the Starbucks and Cheetos paper) Name one thing that might be added, deleted, changed, or moved.
I liked your intro, but perhaps instead of saying ethos logos and pathos outright, use some complementary words.
3. Warning flags: check any of the following predominant themes this paper contains that might suggest a weak introduction or thesis:
Advertising is everywhere___ Ads try to persuade us___
Life really isn’t like what the ad proclaims__ Ads have many components__Ads are deceptive__ The ad did a great job__ The ad catches your eye__
4. Find a strong analytical topic sentence and a weak one. Explain why you have identified them as such.
Weak- i think you could change up the last sentence in your intro to have a bit more “flair”
Strong-the first sentence of your conclusion, raises a good point that we know cigarettes are bad yet people still smoke, so something must be convincing them to do so.
5. Comment on the organization of the piece. What other possible arrangement strategies might make more of the material and develop arguments more fully?
I agree with the other commenters. I’m sure you’ll be fine though.
6. You wanted to read more about….
Smoking facts
Finished Review
1. Identify the writer’s main claim about the rhetoric, ideology or and subtext of the piece.
You talk about how the author utilizes the opposite of ethos, logos, and pathos, but I think you should not view it as being opposite. The anti-smoking ad uses ethos, logos, and pathos to persuade viewers to take care of (themselves) and stop smoking.
2. Identify and comment on the writer’s introduction of a context (rhetorical situation) for this piece of rhetoric (think of the Starbucks and Cheetos paper) Name one thing that might be added, deleted, changed, or moved.
Like I said, I don’t think you should talk about the opposite of ethos, logos, and pathos. I don’t really think the opposite of those rhetorical techniques is something you should focus on a lot in your paper. Also, some of your sentences need question marks instead of periods.
Ex: So companies want to sell their product and they don’t care about the people, but what if someone makes a commercial that helps people rethink their situation (from bad to good). (you need a question mark here)
3. Warning flags: check any of the following predominant themes this paper contains that might suggest a weak introduction or thesis:
I feel like you shouldn’t focus on the advertisements that sell alcohol and such dangerous items. You should focus on how this anti-smoking commercial displays ethos, logos, and pathos to convince their audience not to smoke. You can still include how this anti-smoking commercial is different from alcohol commercials for example, but I feel like you’re focusing too much on differentiating the two types of commercials. Also, try to stick to present tense as much as possible.
4. Find a strong analytical topic sentence and a weak one. Explain why you have identified them as such.
I think that you should include a separate paragraph for each of the rhetorical techniques and then use topic sentences introducing the rhetorical technique that you will discuss in that paragraph. You can still include the sentences you’ve used as topic sentences in your rough draft, but I feel like you should not include them as topic sentences in your final paper.
5. Comment on the organization of the piece. What other possible arrangement strategies might make more of the material and develop arguments more fully?
I think you can improve your organization by including separate paragraphs for all the three rhetorical techniques. Then you can talk about how those different rhetorical techniques (ethos, logos, and pathos) are portrayed in the commercial. Or if one of the rhetorical techniques isn’t really used in the commercial, you can just briefly include it in one of your main paragraphs.
6. You wanted to read more about….
I wanted to read more about how different rhetorical techniques are used in this commercial. You have the correct ideas, but you just have to mesh them in a way so that the paper flows.
1. Identify the writer’s main claim about the rhetoric, ideology or and subtext of the piece.
You talk about how the author utilizes the opposite of ethos, logos, and pathos, but I think you should view it as being opposite. The anti-smoking ad uses ethos, logos, and pathos to persuade viewers to take care of (themselves) and stop smoking.
2. Identify and comment on the writer’s introduction of a context (rhetorical situation) for this piece of rhetoric (think of the Starbucks and Cheetos paper) Name one thing that might be added, deleted, changed, or moved.
Like I said, I don’t think you should talk about the opposite of ethos, logos, and pathos. I don’t really understand what the opposite of those rhetorical techniques really means. Also, some of your sentences need question marks instead of periods.
Ex: So companies want to sell their product and they don’t care about the people, but what if someone makes a commercial that helps people rethink their situation (from bad to good). (you need a question mark here)
3. Warning flags: check any of the following predominant themes this paper contains that might suggest a weak introduction or thesis:
Advertising is everywhere___ Ads try to persuade us___
Life really isn’t like what the ad proclaims__ Ads have many components__Ads are deceptive__ The ad did a great job__ The ad catches your eye__
4. Find a strong analytical topic sentence and a weak one. Explain why you have identified them as such.
5. Comment on the organization of the piece. What other possible arrangement strategies might make more of the material and develop arguments more fully?
I think you can improve your organization by including separate paragraphs for all the three rhetorical techniques.
6. You wanted to read more about….