The article,“Why Are Bloggers Still Sitting at the Kids’ Table? The Popularity of Online News and the Federal Shield Law,” was posted on March 1, 2010 by Andrew Moshirnia. The author frequently writes about citizen journalism and the laws of journalism. He is a second year law student at Harvard Law School. Through the techniques of support from outside sources, Toulmin’s framework, Aristotle’s three appeals, and avoiding the bandwagon fallacy, the author effectively presents his argument. He supports that the Federal Shield Laws should also apply to amateur news reporters and independent bloggers.
Andrew Morshirnia begins his article by quoting a recent report from the Pew Internet and American Life Project concerning the rise of the Internet as a news platform. This reference to an authoritative outside source contributes to the logos and ethos appeals. Logically, Morshirnia states the facts through the quotation from this organization. Ethically, he is providing the basis of his argument with a respected source of information. By mentioning the latest news regarding the Internet evolving into a news platform, Moshirnia establishes his credibility as a writer by letting the reader know that his facts came from a reliable source.
The author’s entire argument can be based on Stephen Toulmin’s framework (Chapter 14e). Each paragraph is constructed to have one claim, which is defined as one arguable statement. This structure helps the reader follow the author’s argument in a precise way without confusion. Qualifiers, limiting statements to the claim, are used to clarify his points of argument. According to Toulmin, a claim is only as good as the reasons and evidence attached to it. Moshirnia supports every claim in his article with support from an outside source. The author presents warrants, or assumptions, that connect the claims with the reasons and evidence. These warrants are strategically placed after strong claims, which help the author convince the reader of his argument. Toulmin’s framework can be applied to this author’s argument. Morshirnia used this basic set up, which is allows the reader to effectively follow his argument.
The ethos, pathos, and logos appeals throughout this article allow the author to present his argument in a variety of ways to the reader. Moshirnia presents an ethos argument by quoting the House and Senate’s statements regarding the Shield Laws. The House and Senate are both reputable sources, therefore providing the reader with reasons to believe the factual evidence. Also, to establish his authority as a writer, Andrew Morshirnia includes information at the end of his blog that he is currently a Harvard Law Student. With this notation, the writer expands his credentials in the eyes of the reader because of his association with a premier Ivy League school. The reader assumes that he is qualified and has the education level to express opinions about the law. Ultimately, this notation creates respect for the author.
The pathos appeal is presented in his argument when the author tries to make the reader feel empathy for amateur and independent writers. Andrew Moshirnia writes “The argument against extending a shield law to bloggers seems to be rooted in silly notions of traditionalism: the law should apply only to salaried newspapermen because only those individuals are our trusted news gatherers.” This statement allows the reader to understand the unreasonable claim of the opposing side of this issue. By using the pathos appeal, Moshirnia causes the reader to emotionally respond and choose a side in the current debate.
From a variety of sources, the author provides factual evidence and statistics to further his argument. The logos appeal is used frequently in this article through the use of evidence. Statistics strengthen the argument by establishing credibility and persuading the reader. The Pew Internet and American Life Project, the House, and the Senate are three institutions that are used by the author. At the end of his article, Moshirnia provides a large paragraph of statistical evidence from the Pew Internet and American Life Project. The author writes, “Let the numbers recitation begin!” He uses these numbers to support his argument even further and continue to persuade the reader why the shield law should extend to the independent writer. The statistics strike an important balance between the logos and ethos appeals. With such a strong ending to his argument, Andrew Morshirnia leaves the reader pondering about the paragraph of statistics. This conclusion is very effective in persuading the reader to agree with the author.
By using multiple distinguished sources, Andrew Moshirnia supports both sides of the argument equally. Since the author provides opposing viewpoints regarding the issue from both the House and the Senate, he avoids the bandwagon fallacy (Chapter 14f). A fallacy is a fault in an argument’s structure that may call into question the argument’s evidence or conclusions (Chapter 13d). This fallacy suggests that a great movement is under way and the reader will be a fool or a traitor not to join in. Morhshirnia carefully constructed his argument in order to avoid this fallacy, because a fallacy could discredit his whole argument.
The author uses persuasive methods to win the reader over in accepting his point of view. Multiple sources are used to strengthen his credibility. Toulmin’s framework is used in order to present his argument clearly and logically. The logos appeal is represented through the factual evidence and statistics. Without these facts, there would be no reason to believe Moshirnia, because he would have no outside support of his argument. The ethos appeal is shown through the reliable sources that he uses when providing his statistics. Without a solid ethos appeal, the factual evidence that Moshirnia provides would mean nothing, because there would be no way to prove the legitimateness of the information. Finally, the pathos appeal is important, because it is used to persuade the reader’s emotions to agree with his argument. Without a pathos appeal, the reader could not have any emotional response. The author avoids the bandwagon fallacy by presenting both sides of his argument, which is fair to the reader. Through the use of these many tools and elements, Andrew Morshirnia constructs an effective argument for the reader.
By using multiple distinguished sources, Andrew Moshirnia supports both sides of the argument equally. Since the author provides opposing viewpoints regarding the issue from both the House and the Senate, he avoids the bandwagon fallacy (Chapter 14f). A fallacy is a fault in an argument’s structure that may call into question the argument’s evidence or conclusions (Chapter 13d). This fallacy suggests that a great movement is under way and the reader will be a fool or a traitor not to join in. Morhshirnia carefully constructed his argument in order to avoid this fallacy, because a fallacy could discredit his whole argument.
The author uses persuasive methods to win the reader over in accepting his point of view. Multiple sources are used to strengthen his credibility. Toulmin’s framework is used in order to present his argument clearly and logically. The logos appeal is represented through the factual evidence and statistics. Without these facts, there would be no reason to believe Moshirnia, because he would have no outside support of his argument. The ethos appeal is shown through the reliable sources that he uses when providing his statistics. Without a solid ethos appeal, the factual evidence that Moshirnia provides would mean nothing, because there would be no way to prove the legitimateness of the information. Finally, the pathos appeal is important, because it is used to persuade the reader’s emotions to agree with his argument. Without a pathos appeal, the reader could not have any emotional response. The author avoids the bandwagon fallacy by presenting both sides of his argument, which is fair to the reader. Through the use of these many tools and elements, Andrew Morshirnia constructs an effective argument for the reader.
0 comments:
Post a Comment