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