RCL #2.5: Persuasive Essay – Rough Plan
As I have stated previously, the topic of my persuasive essay is the controversy regarding the censorship of and restrictions of sales on video games. More specifically, I will spend the paper arguing why this is NOT a fair, viable solution. As both a passionate, lifelong gamer and a strong advocate for free speech, I felt that this specific topic for my essay was like a match made in heaven! As such, I greatly look forward to presenting making a solid argument, the audience of which mainly consists of those currently between the ages of 18 to 35 (also known as “millennials”), who grew up in a time where video game graphics became more realistic and therefore portrayed more lifelike violence, in turn creating this debate.
My audience has heard the cries of (mostly) older generations, who proclaim that violent video games are responsible for real-world atrocities such as mass shootings, among other things. Many of these naysayers have even gone to state that regulation of these games is necessary. I plan to dispel the argument through a variety of methods, including statistics on crime, shootings, and the number of regular gamers; this will be done as a means to “arm” the audience with the knowledge on how few people actually are violent criminals relative to the number of those who play video games on a consistent basis. Additionally, I will stress the importance of the responsibility of parents, not the government, in controlling what games kids play. In other words, I will make appeals to logic, or “logos”.
In terms of appeal to emotion, I definitely want to have it present in my paper, while at the same time making sure that it does not overstay its welcome and come at the expense of reason. One idea that I have in which I would possibly use pathos would be to “hook” my audience in with an instance of how unfair it can be when something that can be fun is taken away from everyone just because a select few misuse it. For example, I may ask something along the lines of: “is it fair for the government to ban candy just because some random person got a heart attack from eating too much of it?” However, part of me is worried that starting my argument out with something like this will cause my audience to be too invested in their emotions from the get-go.
If I were to pick my biggest concern for this project, it would definitely be what I personally perceive as a lack of real credibility on the subject, or ethos. True, I can cite the best sources, but part of me fears that I do not have the credentials to discuss such a hot-button issue. Perhaps I could mitigate this by intertwining some gaming history as a means to give my arguments some context, but I am unsure as to whether or not this adds much. Additionally, while I want to persuade people to believe in what I am arguing, I am still not certain on what my “call to action” will be. However, I plan to discuss my concerns to my colleagues tomorrow and hope to improve on my shortcomings as best I can.