TOW #13: Pamela Anderson PETA Advertisement

This provocative and somewhat off-putting poster shows Pam Anderson with
parts of her body marked with words usually used to describe animal
parts that are for sale as food.

The animal rights organization People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) has been known for its liberal stances on removing meat from the human diet, banning the use of fur in clothing, and stopping the use of animals in laboratory testing.  One of their spokespeople is actress, model, and activist Pamela Anderson, who has been a vegan for many years.  She has posed in numerous PSAs for the organization, but the one above has been seen by many as a disgrace; she is clad in only a revealing bikini, allowing viewers to see the words and dotted lines all over her body.  Those are the same words given to parts of animals that are consumed by humans.  PETA's message is clear: all animals are the same, and if we don't eat humans, then we shouldn't eat animals.
The most obvious thing about the poster is Anderson herself, minus the words all over her body.  She's regarded by many as a gorgeous sex symbol, and the poster clearly shows her off; she's wearing almost nothing, she's in full makeup, is sporting a huge hairstyle, and is posed in such a way that her chest and legs are on full display.  Anderson is even giving viewers a bit of a suggestive "come hither" look.  The whole effect is extremely eye-grabbing and definitely "pops" in comparison to many other advertisements, so viewers are more likely to see it and to understand PETA's message.  
Clearly visible on Anderson's body are the same words used to label different kinds of meat for sale, a very strong method of comparison.  Anderson's leg is not different from a chicken leg and her ribs are no different from those of a pig or a cow, PETA claims.  It begs the question that the organization hopes to put into the minds of viewers: why should we kill and eat animals, whose bodies are really no different from our own, while condemning the consumption of humans?  Without those words and dotted lines, the poster's power would be seriously diminished, as viewers would not necessarily think to compare Anderson to animals.
This poster has brought much criticism of PETA, mostly by women who believe that Anderson is being unnecessarily objectified.  They argue that women are often already seen as nothing but "pieces of meat" for the pleasures of men and that this advertisement encourages such a view.  It is true that PETA could have done this in a much different way, by perhaps having a anatomical diagram of a "generic" person, not sexualized in the way that Anderson has been.  Whatever the case, the poster certainly grabs the attention of anyone who may happen upon it and may make viewers think more about including meat in their diets.  In addition, some people may never have heard of or seen the advertisement without all the controversy surrounding it, which helps in getting PETA's message out there.


P.S. To be clear, I don't like this.  I think it's sexist and unnecessary.  PETA is kind of awful in a lot of ways.  You should look it up.  Go.  Wikipedia is calling you.  Go.


Image link: http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2010/10/22/1287767319786/
Pamela-Anderson-in-Peta-c-006.jpg

TOW #12: "Who Says Math Has to Be Boring?" by The New York Times Editorial Board

I am definitely not a math person, but the article "Who Says Math Has to Be Boring?"
made me understand just how important math is for everyone's future, given the way the world is turning, and that STEM subjects are not well-taught in high school.

I hate math.  It's as simple as that.  I'm not very good at it, I don't find it interesting, I don't see how I personally will use half the things I learn, and I find it rather tedious, difficult, and confusing.  However, the article "Who Says Math Has to Be Boring?" that recently appeared in the opinion section of The New York Times has made me think about math a bit differently; perhaps the subject is not inherently mundane and, as I often call it, awful, but maybe the way it has been introduced to me is.  The editorial argues that high schoolers do not appreciate the value of a STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) subject or career and do not even have the skills necessary to pursue those things.  However, instead of blaming the students, the article blames the education system for not sufficiently teaching students about these topics.  Despite the fact that it was in the opinion section, the article uses many hard statistics and appeals to the authority of a certain President Obama to prove that STEM careers and skills have been sorely neglected in high school. 
A person's mere opinion about how STEM  subjects and careers are undervalued by high school students may not be enough to convince readers that there is actually a problem.  However, the Editorial Board supplements their opinion with statistics, often from distinguished universities and organizations.  For example, they write, "Nearly 90 percent of high school graduates say they're not interested in a career or a college major involving science, technology, engineering or math, known collectively as STEM, according to a survey of more than a million students who take the ACT test" (Editorial Board 1).  No one can deny that 90 percent is a pretty high number, especially considering the population of high school students in the United States.  Having a statistic like that, in addition to the others, makes it easier for readers to believe that the STEM awareness and ability situations is dire and that the suggestions the Editorial Board makes are warranted.
Towards the end of the article, there is a section where the writers suggest that schools give students real-life experience in the world of STEM and talk about President Obama's position on the topic.  They write, "... high school in Brooklyn known as P-Tech, which President Obama recently visited... prepares students for jobs like manufacturing technician and software specialist... President Obama announced a promising new grant program to encourage dozens more high schools to offer job-oriented STEM education" (Editorial Board 1).  As the leader of our nation, President Obama is a public figure, and often his opinions are emulated by others.  When one hears that he visited a technical school, one realizes that the school must be in some way extraordinary.  When one hears that he announced a grant that would allow high schools to educate students so they can enter STEM careers, one realizes that high schoolers must not be interested in STEM or have the necessary skills.  Name-dropping President Obama shines a light on this issue, making the public more aware of it and classifying it as something worth paying attention to. 


Article link: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/08/opinion/sunday/who-says-math-has-to-be-boring.html?ref=opinion&_r=0

TOW #11: "The Pitfalls of Dating and Mating With Social Media" by Tyler Curry

All of these social media sites and more, writer Tyler Curry of The Advocate argues,
can ruin a relationship by presenting narrow or outdated views of a person.

One would expect that those who oppose social media are middle-aged or elderly people, unused to the influence of technology in our modern world, or conservatives who believe that you should get to know someone in person by talking to them head-on.  However, in his op-ed piece published in LGBT-interest magazine The Advocate, Tyler Curry, a younger writer, familiar with social media, argues that it can ruin many relationships just after they begin by presenting a false or outdated image of a person and that people should "unplug" when it comes to finding "The One".  By apparently addressing the reader personally and giving numerous realistic examples, Curry definitely highlights the problems social media causes when it comes to dating and is probably successful at convincing readers to agree with him.
Most magazine articles would not address the reader as "you" or use phrasing like "your best foot forward", but Curry does this throughout "The Pitfalls of Dating and Mating With Social Media".  For example, he writes, "If you didn’t already Facebook-stalk the man you're meeting for Friday night plans, you most definitely will afterward. The updates he posts, the photos he takes, and the statuses he likes have become equally as important as the words out of his mouth" (Curry 1).  Using such personal phrasing causes the reader to identify with what Curry is writing about; "you" is much more up-close than "one" or "some people".  If Curry had used those words, a reader may think, "Oh, other people stalk their dates on Facebook? How weird!" However, when he uses "you" and "your", the reader thinks, "I've definitely done that from time to time", as they can't hide from it.  From personal identification with a claim, it is a short jump to identification and agreement with an argument as a whole.
Of course, Curry goes further to make the reader understand and agree with his argument by including examples of how social media can wreck a relationship.  He states, "He made you laugh, he was charming, and you left dinner a little intrigued. But you just couldn’t wait until he returned from his work trip, so you decided to perform a harmless Internet search. Some guys are just not very photogenic. Suddenly you’re questioning the real connection you had because you are having trouble picturing your wedding photos together" (1).  Obviously, Curry intimates, photographs do not show the real person, and should not be viewed as a window into the soul.  Even though you may have a date with someone and like them a lot, thanks to social media, you can find one minor undesirable detail about them that makes you dislike them; this prevents relationships from growing.  Besides highlighting undesirable traits, Curry argues later, profiles on social media sites can be outdated and provide a view only of how a person used to be, not who they are today.  With all of these examples, a reader cannot deny that social media can cause a lot of problems between two people who are dating, and they may even see that "unplugging" whilst on the dating scene is the best option.  

Article: http://www.advocate.com/commentary/tyler-curry/2013/11/22/op-ed-pitfalls-dating-and-mating-social-media

TOW #10: The Hot Zone by Richard Preston

This is an extreme magnification of the Ebola virus, an violently deadly pathogen
 that first cropped up along the Ebola river in the Democratic Republic of the Congo.
Approximately two-thirds of people who contract Ebola die from it.

In 1994, Richard Preston, who has written numerous pieces about bio-terrorism and dangerous diseases, released a book titled The Hot Zone, filled with stories about viral hemorrhagic fevers, their symptoms, and how they have wreaked havoc all over the world.  It is written much like a work of fiction, and readers might wish that the terrifying stories contained within it were indeed made up, as none of them are tales for the weak of heart.  Preston's repeated use of grim anecdotes and quotations from highly esteemed experts on viral hemorrhagic fevers force the reader to understand the horror of these diseases and perhaps even to become deeply afraid themselves.  I know from personal experience that has certainly succeeded, as after I started reading the book, I had some trouble sleeping, and no one can deny that he paints these diseases as extraordinarly dangerous to everyone on the planet.
The Hot Zone does not open, as one may expect, with a science-heavy explanation of what viral hemorrhagic fevers are.  Instead, Preston tells readers about a victim of Marburg virus (MARV) upon whom Preston bestows the false name Charles Monet.  Preston describes his initial symptoms (backaches and headaches), before describing Monet's experience on a plane to Nairobi so he could get to a hospital.  He writes, "His eyes are the color of rubies... his whole head is turning black-and-blue... The muscles of his face droop... His personality is being wipes away by brain damage... He loses consciousness... he continues to vomit blood and black matter... The linings of his intestines have come off and are being expelled" (Preston 17-24).  It is clear from these passages that Monet suffered greatly before his death and that any victim who comes down with MARV or any other viral hemorrhagic fever, will have the same experience.  This inspires readers to think "This could happen to me or to anyone I know", striking fear into their very hearts.  After reading this section and others like it in the book, it is difficult to deny that this type of disease is very scary and serious.  However, as Preston himself is not a medical expert, some readers may doubt these stories.  Combating this are Preston's multiple mentions of people who are experts on viral hemorrhagic fevers and other serious diseases.  He interviews people such as Major Nancy Jaax and her husband Major Jerry Jaax, veterinarians at the United States Army Medical Research Institute for Infectious Diseases (USAMRIID) and uses their experiences working with the Reston and Ebola viruses as material for The Hot Zone.  Most of the information about viral hemorrhagic fevers in the book come from people like the Jaaxes, and the rest from Preston's own research.  Readers are more likely to believe things written in The Hot Zone when experts are referred to and quoted, as they obviously have more knowledge in this particular subject area.  

TOW #9: Apple Advertisment

The smaller white words say "32 GB iPhone starting at just $349" and that small
object next to the iPhone appears to be some kind of bluetooth device. 

Apple is a world-famous, insanely popular technology company, and their lines of iPhone is probably their best-known product.  Although the company releases a newer iPhone with apparently minor modifications every few months, those customers loyal to Apple or looking to try something new buy every single one.  This advertisement is plain, boring, and dark at first glance, but it is made with the sole purpose of trying to get people to buy the new iPhone.  It appeals to five characteristics that are very important to consumers (besides price, of course): brand, looks, speed, and age, and therefore chicness, of the product.
Apple and the ad agency worked together to make this ad, and they wisely chose to display the Apple logo on the phone.  Apple is very popular and is known for its excellent engineering and design; it is trusted by consumers more than almost any other tech company.  This trust, this credibility, is shown through that little logo, thereby making an appeal to ethos.  As this ad is for the iPhone, it includes a picture of the new one, showing off its clean, smooth lines and cool, gray color.  Consumers love owning "attractive" objects, and when they see a phone with these characteristics, which are very popular at the moment, they want to buy it.  The text on the right side of the advertisement gives one example of the new iPhone's superiority: it is "faster", presumably than older models.  In this fast-paced world, people want products that keep up with their busy lives and are used to speed.  Reading that the new iPhone is fast, even though it's a very vague description, appeals to the desires of the consumer.  On the subject of newness, this ad clearly states that this iPhone is the newest product.  The word "new" is nowadays associated with terms like "modern" and "superior" and "updated", and in the realm of technology, anyone would agree that newer is better.  Many consumers also believe, often subconsciously, that the newer their purchased objects the "better" they are as people, so clearly, new, sleek iPhones are very appealing.
All of these "devices", and others that go unmentioned here, make the iPhone extremely enticing to consumers, often too enticing to ignore.  It would take a solid dislike of Apple products or complete indifference to technology to ignore such a message, but what about hardcore Apple lovers?  It's easy say that they'd fall head over heels for the newest iPhone after seeing this ad.

IRB Intro #2: The Hot Zone: A Terrifying True Story by Richard Preston

Over the past few decades, many serious diseases have ravaged the planet, prompting panic and death wherever they spread; HIV/AIDS and H1N1, especially, have been the target of much media scrutiny, studies into vaccines and cures, and cautionary tales.  However, there are other diseases, not quite as well known, that are still quite terrifying and often deadly.  In his book The Hot Zone: A Terrifying True Story, written in 1994, Richard Preston describes the events surrounding the discovery or outbreak of several types of viral hemorrhagic fevers, which are often incredibly lethal to humans and primates.  The book's focus is on Reston virus, which cropped up near Washington, D.C., and it was hailed by critics as horrific but informative.  Preston has written numerous pieces on similar topics and is known for doing a lot of background research to make his books, essays, and articles as factual as possible. 
I've always been a fan of fictional stories about pandemics and epidemics; the films Contagion, Outbreak, and I am Legend fascinate me, and I love learning about things like the Black Death and the effect they had on history.  Since I always have to choose a non-fiction book for my IRB, I thought I'd never get to read anything very dramatic or creatively written about serious diseases.  However, once I heard of The Hot Zone and learned it was a non-fiction book that was written like a bio-thriller, I was very excited to read it.  I hope that I learn a lot from this book about ebola and associated diseases so I can understand the havoc they wreak upon the world, while still getting to follow an excellent story.

Tow #8: Zealot by Reza Aslan

Though Reza Aslan tries to uncover the real Jesus Christ by using sources other
 than the Gospels, the above quote makes an excellent point: as He lived two
thousand years ago and has had His identity twisted, we'll never truly
know who He was or what He was like.

In his new and controversial book Zealot, religious scholar Reza Aslan tries to uncover and describe the "true" Jesus Christ that has been lost throughout the centuries.  He does an excellent job of doing this without relying on traditional sources, such as the Gospels, that historians know are probably not accurate.  Instead of rewriting the story of Jesus, Aslan merely disproves beliefs about His life that people typically hold.  The portrait he paints of Jesus is a believable mixture of Biblical Jesus and the one described by other sources, and Aslan really makes him come alive.  Despite this apparent tameness, Zealot is not a book for anyone who identifies as Christian or anyone who finds religious debates boring or trite, as the traditional Jesus story is continually refuted. 
Although Zealot is a biography of Jesus Christ, and biographies do not often get "up close and personal" with a reader, Aslan often addresses the reader as "you" and has them pretend to be witnesses to history.  This is a very striking style of writing for this genre, and it stands out more than anything else in Zealot.  For instance, he writes, "This is as close as you will eve be to the presence of God... The stink of carnage is impossible to ignore. It clings to the skin, the hair, becoming a noisome burden you will not soon shake off... Picture the high priest Jonathan standing at the alter..." (Aslan 5, 8).  Aslan goes on in this passage to describe the grisly murder of the high priest, a turning point in Jerusalem's history.  This methods of addressing readers allows them to better picture historical scenes of which there are no photographs or accurate drawings and helps them to understand the emotional effects of certain events.  Though pathos is not necessary to make an argument, it helps to round one out when logos (provided by historical facts) and ethos (provided by Aslan's background) are already present.  Aslan charmingly chose titles for the chapters of Zealot that give hints as to what each chapter is about; these are epigraphs of sorts except for the fact that they are not always quotes.  For example, chapter seven is entitled "The Voice Crying Out in the Wilderness".  Upon further reading, one discovers that that section is about John the Baptist, renowned for preaching new ideas about baptism and forgiveness of sins an for roaming the wilderness of Israel.  In this case, and many others, chapter titles are hints (noticed mostly by more attentive readers) as to what direction the book is now heading.

Tow #7: "The monarchy is at odds with a modern Britain" from The Observer

The British Royal Family has increased in size and has gained popularity since
this photograph was taken a few years ago, but some still believe the family
represents inequality, undeserved privilege, and is a threat to democracy in
Britain and the Commonwealth. 

For the past few years the British Royal Family has been in the spotlight, as the recent weddings, birth, and christenings of various members have all drawn much positive publicity. However, many still argue against the usefulness and effectiveness of the royals, claiming that British citizens deserve more rights and more equality.  This editorial from The Observer, featured in its sister paper The Guardian, argues the same and, being in a British newspaper, is clearly aimed at citizens of that country.  However, it does not state its point a way that would turn any royalist into a fervent republican.  Though many pieces with epigraphs include only one, this article seems to have two.  A photograph of the late Christopher Hitchens is inserted above the article, the words "Christopher Hitchens said we should emancipate ourselves from the mental habits of royalism" set beneath the picture. The second epigraph is at the end of the first paragraph, which states "As republicanism gathered a little wind in the 1990s... Ian McEwan announced: 'It is time to say boo! to the big goose.'" The title of the article might not be enough to clue some readers in to the subject matter, as after all, it could just be pointing out that the monarchy is outdated instead of practically calling for its end. However, these two epigraphs, each coming from a well-known British author, set the tone of the editorial quite nicely and make it clear what direction it is going in.To try to support their argument, the author of the editorial uses also political facts and statistical evidence.  For example, the author writes, "According to the campaign group, Republic, in the top 20 UK tourist attractions, Windsor Castle is the only "living" royal tourist draw... it only just creeps in at number 17... Tourists will visit whether or not we have a sovereign."  They also state "We have no written constitution, no right to call ourselves citizens.  In a time of alleged increasing transparency, the royal household is not subject to the Freedom of Information Act."  An argument is stronger when supported with hard facts and not just quotes from authors or emotional protests.  However, in this case, the problem with the above passages, as well as many others in the article, is that none of the information is a secret; British citizens know their place in the country and they know how their political system works.  As for the Windsor Castle example, it is probable that many readers would find it irrelevant; even the author states that there are "more serious points to make".  If the author truly wants to convert royalist readers to republicanism, they would be better off citing concrete facts about things that negatively affect and anger the British people instead of restating that which has been written down over and over and assuming that the British have no idea what is going on in their own country.

Link: http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/jul/27/future-of-the-royal-family

TOW #6: Gun Safety Advertisment

The words at the bottom may be difficult to read, so they are as follows:
"We won't sell Kinder eggs in the interest of child safety. Why not assault weapons?"
with the URL momsdemandaction.org.

This advertisment is sponsored by Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America, an anti-gun organization formed in the aftermath of the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting.  It depicts a boy holding a Kinder egg, a plastic egg surrounded by thin layers of white and milk chocolate that holds a small toy, and a girl holding an assault weapon.  The ad criticizes the idea that Kinder eggs, which are sold in Europe, are banned in the United States because of the choking risk, but that assault weapons are not.  It can be assumed that Kinder eggs can be substituted by other non-threatening products that are banned in the name of child safety.  
Many written works mention or evoke colors in order to set a mood, and this ad does something very similar.  There is not much light in the ad, but there are a lot of shadows and drab colors, including various shades of gray.  This creates a dark or depressing mood, appropriate for the serious subject matter.  Also prominent are elements of juxtaposition: one between the black, dangerous gun and the innocent, colorful Kinder egg, and the other between the young girl and the gun.  The former aims to make viewers believe that Kinder eggs and other products are harmless and that assault weapons are too deadly to be legal, while the latter shows that assault weapons do not belong anywhere around children, let alone in their hands, thereby supporting the aim of Moms Demand Action.
The ad can be thought-provoking or confusing to look at, depending on the viewer.  It is obvious that the advertisement wants to convince people that assault weapons are dangerous, should be banned, and that the fact that they haven't is ridiculous.  However, for those who have never heard of Kinder eggs, the message is confusing, and many believe that banning them is sensible because of the choking risk.  Consequently, the ad's message would not really reach or affect these people, though it would affect those who fully understand what the ad is saying.

Link: http://adland.tv/files/imagecache/postimage/media/print/ChooseOne3.jpg

TOW #5: "We're Still in the Dark About Kids and Concussions" by Dr. Robert Cantu

The brain is the most important and possibly one of the most delicate parts
of the body.  Unfortunately, the brains of many young athletes are at
risk due to concussions, which often happen repeatedly.

Many kids and teenagers play sports, which typically involve a lot of physical contact and roughhousing and can result in severe injuries as well as concussions.  This fact has received a lot of press lately as seriously concussed young athletes, their families, and doctors go public with their experiences.  In this article featured in Time Magazine, Dr. Robert Cantu argues that many doctors are unsure about how risky certain sports are and the exact effects of concussions on children, then goes on to outline a study that would expose unknowns such as these.  Fortunately, his piece is written in terms that anyone, not just medical professionals, could understand, but it would probably resonate best with young athletes, their parents, and doctors who work with children who play sports.
As the article is about a serious medical topic, a reader would have to know the writer is credible in order to believe that the information is true.  Throughout the piece, Cantu writes in the first person, using the word "we" to refer to a group made up of himself and other medical professionals.  He talks about speaking to pediatricians and how he has "more than 375 papers published in peer-reviewed journals".  The clincher comes at the end when his qualifications are listed, stating that he works at Boston University as a clinical professor in the department of neurosurgery and as their co-director for the Center for the Study of Traumatic Encephalopathy.  All of these culminate in an excellent appeal to ethos, proving to the reader that Cantu knows what he is writing about and is qualified to make the conclusions he does.  "We're Still in the Dark About Kids and Concussions" is an opinion piece about a serious problem, so Cantu also offers a potential solution to the problem: in order to find out how concussions affect children, a ten-year study of athletes playing many different sports would take place.  This addresses a concern he mentioned earlier that there is not enough information about concussions to justify banning sports for children under certain ages or mandating more safety gear.  Cantu therefore addresses the opposition, but not to show them that they're wrong, but to prove that one day the safety measures he supports will be fully justified.
Though Cantu writes very well and makes a convincing argument, it would not go over well with those who love to play sports; when people enjoy something, they sometimes dismiss the problems with it.  Also, he notes the expense of the study he proposes, so his financially-minded readers would too be concerned and possibly disagree with him.


Link: http://ideas.time.com/2013/10/10/were-still-in-the-dark-about-kids-and-concussions/?iid=op-main-belt

TOW #4: Zealot by Reza Aslan

Zealot endeavors to tell the true story of Jesus Christ, but even the cover is a lie:
it portrays Jesus as a white man even though he was an Arab Jew.

Religious scholar Reza Aslan has made quite the stir in recent months with his new book Zealot: The Life and Times of Jesus of Nazareth.  As the title suggests, the book aims to tell the truest story of the somewhat-mysterious prophet possible, as it has been repeatedly obscured and changed over the past two thousand years.  Obviously, religion is a touchy subject.  While anyone would be capable of reading Zealot, only those who are deeply interested in religion, history, or both, and are receptive to reading a story about Jesus different from the concocted one presented nowadays would actually be able to absorb and respect the information in the book.  This TOW focuses on the introduction, as it is incredibly interesting for reasons explored below.
As the book is a biography that strives to be as accurate as possible, Aslan begins to use facts in the very introduction to tell readers that their journey to discover the real Jesus could be surprising.  He writes, "We now have access to an entire library of noncanonical scriptures written mostly in the second and third centuries that provides a vastly different perspective on the life of Jesus of Nazareth... discovered in Upper Egypt, near the town of Nag Hammadi, in 1945." (Alsan 5).  He sets the reader up to expect not a lot of speculation and guesswork, as in many books about religious figures from long ago, but cold hard facts put together to support historically-possible theories.  This makes him seem much more credible, someone who is much more sure of the picture they are painting.  At the end of the introduction, Aslan also makes a quick appeal to pathos.  He tells his readers, "The Jesus that is uncovered... may not be the Jesus we expect... but in the end, he is the only Jesus we can access by historical means. Everything else is a matter of faith." (Aslan 9).  In one way, it is to be expected that Aslan would bring a bit of emotion into such a topic; Jesus is a religious prophet, and religion always means feeling something.  Readers could become a bit miffed that nothing about faith was really mentioned in the introduction, but Aslan wisely acknowledges that faith and views about Jesus are tightly entwined.
Aslan focuses on the fact that the man most of us know as Jesus is essentially a myth and that there are many facets to His complicated story.  He conveys this message to readers very well, as he acknowledges the faith that is always involved when one thinks about what version of Jesus they believe to be true while still writing about the "real", historically accurate Jesus.

TOW #3: CDC Anti-Smoking Ad

This warning advertisement from the CDC connects smoking to heart problems and urges
smokers to kick their often-fatal habit before such problems set in. Experts
everywhere hope these will lower the numbers of smoking
adults in the United States.

In March of this year, the release of this advertisement sent shock waves across the country due to its graphic nature and hard-hitting message: it depicts an actual smoker, about to undergo open heart surgery, with a warning connecting smoking to health problems, specifically those that would require drastic open heart surgery.  It was unveiled by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), a world-renowned public health institute that in recent years has shown great concern about the numbers of adult smokers in the United States.  According to their website, 19% of adults smoke cigarettes.  As smoking is infamous for negatively affecting nearly every organ in the body and for causing a variety of health issues, the CDC hoped that advertisements such as the one featured above would encourage people to kick the dangerous habit before health problems arise.  The advertisement is obviously aimed at current smokers, but it could also target the friends and loved ones of people who smoke; they could use things, like this advertisement, to encourage smokers they know to quit.
Audiences are more likely to connect to a text or visual if the person who wrote it or is featured in it is similar to them or knows what they're talking about.  The ad appeals to ethos in this way, as it features an actual smoker with his own advice for those who haven't stopped smoking; he is in the same group as his audience and therefore knows the effects of smoking first hand.  They are therefore more likely to connect with him and take the ad seriously.  There is also the smallest of anecdotes in this ad: the man smoked, probably for years judging by his apparent age at the time of his surgery, and it resulted in him having severe health problems that had to be remedied by a scary, risky open heart surgery.  His situation is not one anyone would want to be in, and smoking could put a person in his shoes.  This would force viewers to think twice before starting to smoke or to make the decision to quit.
It is difficult to tell whether this ad would succeed in its mission.  On one hand, the message is very serious, and if a viewer was receptive to the information they may decide never to smoke or to quit doing so.  On the other, smoking is a very hard habit to quit, and smokers are warned all the time about the health risks, but continue to smoke anyway.  All in all, it seems only a viewer who is thinking about quitting smoking already would be affected by this ad, since it would reinforce what they would already be thinking.

TOW #2: "The Pope's Radical Whisper"

Pope Francis and some Vatican employees stand near a car, donated by an Italian priest, that
Francis plans to use to drive around Vatican City. He seems to be much more
frugal, down-to-earth, and visually subdued than his predecessor. 

Many have heard recently about the progressive things that relatively-new Pope Francis has been saying and doing, such as his thoughts on homosexuality and his lack of pomp and circumstance, since these things are so abnormal in the modern Catholic Church and within the Vatican itself (two different things, people). However, in this editorial, New York Times columnist Frank Bruni wants readers to understand that Francis has not radicalized the teachings of the Church and didn't "right past wrongs"; instead, he shows a refreshing mix of humility and sincerity and does not have all of the answers. Obviously, this information would be aimed mostly towards Catholics or those who have left the Church because of its teachings and coverings-up of certain scandals but are still interested in its workings.
Some readers may dismiss Bruni's article as praising a trait in Francis (humility) that is not really there or is already present in other famous people. To combat this, Bruni contrasts Francis's humbleness with the lack of it in many politicians, including President Barack Obama: Bruni says "he could take a page from this pope" (Bruni 1). This, as well as other similar examples, force readers to admit that yes, Pope Francis is more humble than many leaders, than even normal people in this age of social media. It supports Bruni's point that Francis is a sort of gift for the Church, as he will probably revitalize it and bring a lot of people back. Towards the beginning of the piece, Bruni describes Francis and his manner. He writes, "It was the sweetness in his timbre, the meekness of his posture... Instead of commanding people to follow him, he invited them to join him. And did so gently, in what felt like a whisper." (1). Since most readers would never have seen Francis in real life and have probably seen little footage of him, the description in this passage helps readers form in their mind a better picture of this pope. In order to believe that someone is humble, it helps to know that they look and act the part, and this passage displays this quite well. 

I think that Bruni would have achieved his purpose of convincing readers that Francis is, in personality at least, quite unlike any recent pope, but only if the reader was someone who was already open to this possibility. If a reader is not, if they need concrete proof that Francis is going to reform the Church completely, they would not believe Bruni; after all, he does acknowledge that Francis has a long way to go, particularly in areas such as women's rights, the sinfulness of homosexuality, and celibate priests. 

TOW #1: What Is Fox New's Problem With Chelsea Manning?

Link: http://www.advocate.com/commentary/2013/09/04/op-ed-what-fox-newss-problem-chelsea-manning

Fox News is often seen as an overtly-conservative media source, but freedom of speech is extended to all, no matter what their political views. Recently, they reached a new low by refusing to refer to Private Chelsea Manning (formerly Private Bradley Manning) using female pronouns and calling her by her proper name after she came out as transgender. Manning was convicted violating the Espionage Act by releasing classified military documents, and was sentenced to 35 years in prison, where she will most likely not receive the sex-reassignment surgery or hormone therapy. In a scathing, yet accurate, op-ed published in the LGBT magazine The Advocate, commentary editor Michelle Garcia criticizes the numerous insensitivities exhibited by Fox News anchors. She says that acknowledging Manning's gender identity is the "human" thing to do. It is clear that her purpose is to say that treating each other well is humane and morally right, and that Fox News does not do this by failing to refer to Manning as a woman. 
This article is intended for those who care about either LGBT issues or about Chelsea Manning, since it rages against those who do not respect them. In order to prove that Fox News has callously dealt with the Manning story, Garcia gives the reader multiple examples of things that happened on-air. She writes "First, Fox News's America's Newsroom host Greg Jarrett continued to use male pronouns to refer to Private Manning after her announcement August 22... And then there was the gem where Fox & Friends teased a segment about Manning while playing Aerosmith's 'Dude Looks Like a Lady.'" (1) As she is trying to make a factual argument, Garcia's article cannot be seen as credible without examples like these; they serve to strengthen her piece. Garcia also uses pathos to appeal to her readers when she emphasizes her central point: "It's silly, right? Using the wrong gender pronouns for a person, when they don't like it. So maybe you shouldn't do it either." (1) As readers would obviously want to be treated kindly themselves, they'd be able to feel for Manning, for others in her situation, and for Garcia in her anger. When one feels an emotional connection to a piece of writing, one is more likely to accept whatever argument it is making. I think that Garcia achieved her purpose quite well, as she appealed to readers' emotionally by showing them her own outrage and supporting it with multiple examples. 

IRB Intro for Zealot: The Life and Times of Jesus of Nazareth by Reza Aslan

Like many religious figures, the true story of Jesus Christ has long been hidden. However, in his new book, religious scholar Reza Aslan tries to tell His story by using stories from the Gospels as well as information discovered by historians and archaeologists. Though I'm no longer religious myself, I've enjoyed learning about various belief systems since attending catechism as a child and later reading Dan Brown's novels featuring religious iconographer Robert Langdon. I also greatly enjoy history in general; one of my favorite books is a double biography of Queen Victoria and Prince Albert. Consequently, when I heard about Zealot from interviews with Aslan on The Daily Show with Jon Stewart and The Colbert Report, I thought it sounded very interesting, a book I could learn a lot from. From Zealot I hope to gain a more complete understanding of the life of Jesus and of His original teachings, as accounts of both have been twisted and changed throughout the centuries. I also want to see what research methods Aslan used to gather his information, since I am interested in becoming a historian or archaeologist; I'm wondering how Aslan could have possibly gathered enough information from thousands of years ago and compile it into a book with a logical and factual message. I'm hoping that Zealot isn't written in such a way that it focuses too heavily on the teachings of the Gospels, as they have been altered and translated countless times since they were written, which, anyway, was decades after Jesus died. Either way, the reviews have been very positive, so I'm hoping this book will live up to them!

"The Good Short Life" by Dudley Clendinen Analysis

"But we don't talk about how to die. We act as if facing death weren't one of life's greatest,
most absorbing thrills and challenges. Believe me, it is. This is not dull." (Clendinen 64)
Image credit goes to artist Ferdinand Hodler

Dudley Clendinen passed away in May 2012 at the age of 67, after a career of writing about societal problems and civil rights. During his final two years, he had been suffering from the neurodegenerative Lou Gehrig's disease, also known as ALS. In his piece "The Good Short Life" he writes about his desire to commit suicide instead of living through the roughest period of his disease. In his essay Clendinen wishes to make readers understand why a terminally ill person would want to end their life on their own terms, to show that doing so it not a disregard for the people in their life. He also addresses that no one thinks about how to die, even though they think about everything else. Clendinen’s piece is also not difficult to read or understand. For all of these reasons, this essay is truly meant for anyone, as everyone is going to die one day and should think about how they want it to happen.

Clendinen uses quite a bit of narration in order to give his readers some background about his life. When telling about receiving the news about his illness, he writes, “When the neurologist gave me the diagnosis that November, he shook my head hand with a cracked smile and released me to the chill, empty parking lot below… I’m not prepared for this, I thought.” (Clendinen 64). He writes a lot about his own thoughts so that the reader understands his choice to take his own life. In the beginning of the essay Clendinen also defines his disease, in case it is unknown or unfamiliar to the reader. He writes about Lou Gehrig, the baseball player for which the disease is named, the symptoms, and which type of ALS he has. Both of these rhetorical strategies make it easier for the reader to connect to Clendinen and therefore to see why he wants to take his own life. Despite this, Clendinen would not achieve his purpose with all readers. Those who do not believe in suicide or in harming oneself in any way would never agree with him; only open-minded ones, or those who are terminally ill or know someone who is, would understand.

"The Foul Reign of 'Self-Reliance'" by Benjamin Anastas Analysis

"As a sad result, it has been the swagger of a man's walk that makes his measure, and
Americans' right to love ourselves before any other that trumps all" (Anastas 5).
Image credit to www.mychild.gov.au

Benjamin Anastas is the author of many works of fiction as well as memoirs, articles, and book reviews. However, his essay “The Foul Reign of Self-Reliance” is rather a combination of a memoir and a review, as Anastas uses his high school literature class as the basis for a criticism of Ralph Waldo Emerson’s “Self-Reliance”. Anastas claims that the self-centered, arrogant nature of the essay has damaged the American public since its publication, convincing them that they always deserve more, are able to achieve absolutely anything, and should only care about themselves. Though no context is given, one can assume that Anastas is becoming increasingly concerned by the prevalence of these attitudes in modern American society and the pride of place given to “Self-Reliance” in American literature. This essay is clearly not meant for fans of Emerson or those who agree with his ideas, as he attacks both throughout his entire essay. Instead, those who are fans of Anastas, staunchly opposed to either Emerson or the overconfident message of “Self-Reliance”, or merely interested in literary criticism would enjoy the essay.

One of the most important things in the essay is the anthology Anastas used in high school, and he describes it in the beginning and refers to it a few times. He vividly illustrates, “The class was early American literature, the textbook an anthology with the heft of a volume of the Babylonian Talmud; a ribbon for holding your place… and a slick hardcover the same shade of green as the back side of a dollar bill.” (Anastas 1). The aforementioned passage sticks in the mind of the reader because it describes the anthology so well and gives it pride of place in the essay. It is also where Anastas found “Self-Reliance”, the piece that his essay is centered around. Anastas also uses a lot of cause and effect analysis, citing Emerson’s work as a possible cause of America’s bloated sense of self-importance; this is the very theme, the very purpose, of his essay, so in addition to being a review-memoir, “The Foul Reign of Self-Reliance” is an examination of this cause-and-effect relationship. Due to the nature of the essay, one can easily say that Anastas accomplished his purpose quite well, as one can hardly find a single praise of Emerson. A reader would walk away knowing that arrogance is not a positive trait and that Emerson’s approval of such an attitude is plainly wrong.

"Humanism" by Richard Sennett Analysis

"In a world filled with mobile people- economic immigrants and political exiles in particular-
an old humanist ideal might help them to give shape to their lives" (Sennett 244).
Image credit to Humanists of Greater Portland

Richard Sennett is a professor of humanities at New York University and a professor of sociology at the London School of Economics. He mentions his famous studies of the modern workplace in his essay “Humanism”, which seem to the basis for his concern about how people are no longer enriching their own life experience, preferring to passively put up with whatever comes their way. Sennett states his purpose on the very first page of the essay: he wants to argue that displacement and bad luck can be dealt with by following the humanist philosophy of finding coherency in conflicting things and taking control of one’s own life. This is what he calls having a “voice”.

To convince his readers to adopt this philosophy, Sennett includes many examples that explain it. For instance, he writes about the philosophers Baruch Spinoza and Pico della Mirandola; they were exiled from their native lands, but even during their unhappy periods they were able to speculate on how man must carve his own path, even though they both believed that man was created by God. Another rhetorical device he uses is comparison, which helps the reader to connect the various pieces of Sennett’s argument and see what humanism means today. When talking about modern tendency to switch between jobs every few years and never find a career, Sennett writes, “These precepts reflect, if they do not precisely mirror, Pico’s understanding of Man as his own Maker…. The human subject should stand apart from his or her circumstances emotionally and intellectually….” (Sennett 248). He also sprinkles a bit of symbolism throughout the essay to show readers how much people are ignoring humanism in seemingly-small ways today. One way in which he does this is writing about email and its speed, lamenting the loss of careful consideration of diction and tone that characterized letter writing in previous decades. This, he claims, is yet another form of the loss of “voice”. 

While Sennett’s essay seems targeted towards anyone curious about the topic and its modern implications, it would be best read by those who are already familiar with humanism, perhaps teachers or college students. However, his basic message, that people should stand up for themselves and take charge of their lives, is very clear and is carried throughout the essay, so he accomplished his purpose very well. 

"The Crazy State of Psychiatry" by Marcia Angell Analysis

"It seems that Americans are in the midst of a raging epidemic of mental illness,
 at least as judged by the increase in the numbers treated for it." (Angell 6)
Credit goes to National Institute of Mental Health at www.nimh.nih.gov/statistics/SMI_AASR.shtml

Dr. Marcia Angell, former editor-in-chief of the New England Journal of Medicine, writes about a worrying trend: mental illnesses, as well as prescription psychoactive drug use, seem to have been on the rise since the 1980s. The essay focuses on the following questions: whether psychoactive drugs work, whether the number of mental illnesses is truly increasing or if specialists are recognizing problems that were always present, or whether the reason behind the apparent increase is simply that there are now too many criteria for mental illnesses. To do this, Angell analyzes the information presented in three books on these topics written by members of the medical profession.

Angell wants to bring this medical conflict to the lay reader, as she tries to make things easier to understand. She defines terms such as “double-blind” and “neurotransmitter” that may be confusing to the reader, and gives simplified explanations as to how processes like the brain’s chemical releases work. This makes it much easier for the reader to comprehend what she is writing about. Instead of just supplying the reader with a steady stream of vague anecdotes to support her point (a method she criticizes psychiatrists for practicing), she uses statistics and quotes. For example, she writes about how in one random study, 46 percent of adults met criteria for having at least one mental illness (Angell 6). She also divides information into sections; each book she writes about has its own section, including the Diagnostic and Statistical Manuel of Mental Disorders and its problems. As this subject is not one that many readers would be familiar with, slowly feeding them each topic makes all of the information easier to handle.

Many would think that Angell means to turn readers against psychiatry or drug companies, even though she does mention that many of these people would swear that drugs work. This is supported by the fact that most of her essay attacks the use of drugs and precious few words are used in support of drugs. However, towards the end, it seems that she thinks there are merely doubts about the effectiveness of drugs, not that they are harmful, as she writes, “…. We need to stop thinking of psychoactive drugs as the best, and often the only, treatment for mental illnesses or emotional distress” (Angell 27) Therefore, her purpose is unclear. If she meant to turn readers against drugs, she succeeded, and if she intended to do the opposite, she most likely has not. 

"Other Women" by Francine Prose Analysis

".... I found out that my husband had, so to speak, worked his way through the group.... In fact, this was not how it happened. In fact, I'm pretty sure that my husband only slept with two of the women in the group.... Obviously, saying all the women in the group makes a better story than saying two of the women in the group." (Prose 240)
Cartoon credit to Mark Anderson, found on www.andertoons.com

Women in the early 1970s were being swallowed up by the feminist revolution, by calls to get jobs and not rush into marriage and to stand up to the patriarchy and all men who willfully upheld it. In 1972, Francine Prose, now a published author and president of the literacy-promoting PEN American Center, is unhappily married and has all but dropped out of a PhD program. Wondering if her womanhood was the reason for her miserable situation (as sexism seemed to be the cause of all problems in those days), she joins a "feminist conscious-raising group" near campus. A few months later, Prose leaves her husband. A year afterward, he tells her that he slept with a few women in the group before Prose had even left him. This seems to her a horrible wrong to commit another woman and completely changes her view of feminism.
Initially, Prose's reason for writing "Other Women" could be unclear to reader; she could easily be a so-called "radfem" raging about the unreliability of men. Fortunately, one can soon determine that Prose is trying to convey a completely different idea, that no gender is better than any other. The clincher comes towards the end when she writes, "I can thank my Cambridge women's group.... for having cured me of the notion that women are no more or less likely to than men to treat people well or badly...." (Prose 241). As the entire essay is one long first-person narration of Prose's experiences, the reader is able to experience her troubles as if they are their own, and can effortlessly connect to Prose and agree with her opinions. Prose describes her husband revealing the truth and her revelation that followed as a cause-and-effect analysis, making the road map of the essay easier for the reader to follow. 
In the minds of many, the feminist tone of the essay would for women only, and admittedly it seems that it is targeted towards women, specifically those who consider themselves feminists. However, its valuable lesson about the disconnection between gender and interpersonal behavior is one that men, as well as people of other genders or of no gender, would benefit from learning. Regardless of the original ambiguity, Prose uses second half of "Other Women" to deliver and elaborate upon her message in such a clear and concise way that it seems even more important than her husband cheating on her. She does well in achieving her purpose.