WIP Response to video

The guy in this video makes some very interesting points that are very hard to argue against. He suggests the idea that labels are created by our government and other political ¬†bodies in order to create a certain connotation about a policy related issue. He continues to say that the people who create these labels understand the power that a label can have and that is why they do it. I completely agree with him and he uses many examples to strengthen his claim. What I agree with as well is that he says labels like these impede true discussion. Because the labels emotionally charge people up, it makes it harder for people to have a sensible, and rational conversation about the topic. He finishes with the end claim that the new labels for guns are just a coverup for the fact that people are the ones who are responsible. Again, I agree with him, but its important to think critically about his claim. Even though individuals are responsible for creating gun violence, does that mean nothing should be done? A question to ponder…

The Classics: Frank Darabont Style

You may recognize the name Frank Darabont from a show most of us know and love (and that is returning very soon). Frank Darabont is the director of the Walking Dead, and for all of us who watch the show, I think we can all agree he has created a fantastic series. But did you know Darabont has made more than just that tv show? In fact, Darabont has created over a dozen tv shows and Hollywood movies, including two of my absolute favorites: The Shawshank Redemption and The Green Mile.


Frank Darabont

First off, let me just say that if you love anything and everything that Morgan Freeman does, then you absolutely need to watch these The Shawshank Redemption. I believe that ¬†it is one of the best Freeman has ever done in his lifetime. That said, he is not the only one that makes this movie fantastic. The film is one of those rare films that draws its audience in from the very beginning and keeps them caged until the end. Darabont’s classical dramatic filmmaking style makes this film an instant classic among audiences of all demographics. Everyone who has had a struggle in life that they felt was unfairly put upon them can relate to this movie that will end up giving you hope in hopeless situations.

Shawshank Redemption

The Green Mile has a similar theme of hope in a world of hopelessness. In fact, there are a good amount of parallels between these two movies in themes and filmmaking style. However, instead of Morgan Freeman, this one has Tom Hanks. Another superstar actor who is one of my favorites. This film creates an atmosphere for the audience that is impossible for the audience to ignore or dislike. If you are ever in a setting where you want to watch just a genuinely good, all around, feel-good movie, I would highly recommend these two. They are a must see in our lifetime.



WIP week 3

I am so excited for this project. Last year in my AP english class, we looked at several ads that tried to be very persuasive and we looked at their rhetorical strategies. Most of them were boring ones that have the same old strategies, but this one was hilarious (and easy to analyze). This was a poster/ad made for Burger Kings in the Singapore markets. Burger King has since said that they hired a foreign advertising agency to produce this ad, and that it does not reflect their feelings and they do not want to exclude anyone by showing this ad. Yet they still kept it going for a good part of 2009 (I may have to double check on that year).

Please keep in mind that this ad is NOT FAKE. It is a real ad, and the description/caption on the bottom is hilarious. Please let me know your reactions to this one because it sure is funny. Aside from the funny aspect to it, I believe that I can effectively analyze the rhetorical strategies of this poster and produce a great report based on this ad. Here it is:


Current Events Heros Week 3: NFL Refs

For anyone that already knows the whole ordeal with the NFL replacement refs and how the regular refs are back, then lets just take a moment to exhale slowly and be relieved that the replacement ref fiasco is over. For those who haven’t heard or don’t know the details, here it is:

Several months ago the contract for the standard NFL referees was expired. The NFL itself is simply a committee/collection of team owners who collectively make the rules and manage the league, including the players and the referees. If you recall last year, the NFL lockout was because of a contractual dispute between the owners (NFL) and the NFL players association (the actual players). This current referee problem was a dispute in the formation of a new contract between the owners and the referees. The details of the entire conflict are very complicated, but essentially the refs felt they deserved more money for their services and more money put into their pension plans because of the rising cost of living. The owners did not want to pay the refs as much as they were asking, so you have a lockout between the refs and the league. As a result, the NFL was forced to hire refs from other non-NFL leagues around the country who were less skilled and knowledgeable about the NFL rules.

One ref calling that the Packers caught it, while the other signals Seattle got it

At first I wanted to believe that the refs won’t change the game, but my hopes were crushed. There were many instances of when the refs were clueless about a rule or blew a call, but the worst one came Monday night in the Green Bay-Seattle game. On the last play of the game, Seattle tried for an end zone pass that would turn their five point deficit into a one point lead as time expired, giving them the win. Well in a confusing play with many bodies trying to catch the ball from both teams, the refs missed an obvious penalty that would have killed Seattle’s chance of scoring and winning. The refs also said that Seattle caught the ball and scored, while many believe that the player did not catch it. All in all, it was a terrible officiating night for the replacement refs and they gave the win to Seattle over several mistakes that would have given Green Bay the win.

This was probably the final, and biggest, straw that destroyed the camel’s back because on Wednesday night, the owners and the refs came to an agreement for a contract that will keep the refs in the league for at least eight more years. Thank you NFL refs for coming back and restoring the integrity of the game.


*Information taken from CNN and ESPN. Image from CNN.com

RCL Opinion article

For this week’s RCL blog, I chose an article from the New York Times titled, “5 Reasons to Intervene in Syria Now.” The link if you would like to read it:



This was an interesting opinion article that is exactly what the title makes the article out to be. The authors of the article start off with a brief intro on Obama’s foreign policy shaped by his actions in the Libya crisis. They say that Obama is known for going quickly in and out of countries instead of intervening in the long term with countries. Then the article goes on to provide 5 reasons we should go quickly in and out of Syria.

I don’t believe that this article is effective in getting its audience to side with the authors’ opinions. The authors use a primarily logos based argument to try to persuade its readers that Obama should take out the president of Syria. The article provides reasons that include giving the U.S. a tactical advantage in the middle east, making allies with anti-Syrian middle east countries, and controlling the Islamic conflict in the middle east. All of these reasons are sound, but the method of presenting these reasons are flawed.

The authors almost just list the reasons with brief explanations after and do not make much of an attempt to persuade the readers one way or another. Instead the authors should have presented the information in a way that put out a sense of urgency and appealed to the reader’s sense of patriotism and humanitarianism. They should have added more text that implied that if we didn’t take care of the Syrian problem, that the United States would become less of an international power, and that many civilians will continue to die under the current Syrian president. Simply naming reasons without any appeal to the reader’s emotions is hardly effective and would not convince many to side with the authors, regardless of how logical the reasons are.