Angry Tweets Won T Help African Lions Summary

In the article “Angry Tweets Won’t Help African Lions” first published on 7/1/2016 in The New York Times Richard Conniff attempts to use the recent death of Zimbabwe’s Cecil the lion as a medium for informing readers of the New York Times about what is going on in Africa and the impact these events are having on the lions. Cecil the lion was a mascot of sorts for Zimbabwe until he was hunted down and killed by Walter Palmer in the name of “Trophy Hunting”. The real driving force behind this seems to not necessarily be Trophy hunting, but in fact is the dwindling number of lions in Africa today. As pointed out by Conniff, one overwhelming problem that is affecting the lion's population is the killing of them and their food supply by impoverished

African themselves to which Conniff claims to be “at a rate estimated at five to 10 times the take from trophy hunting.” Conniff brings attention to West and Central Africa in particular as he lays claim to the fact that most of the hunting done by poachers and bushmeat hunters are done even in protected areas such as national parks. Conniff continues with this idea, explaining about the dwindling food supplies of the lions and how they are even hunted to preserve other wildlife which Muslims may see as sacred due to their rules against eating them.

Conniff continues to talk about the dwindling number of African lions by noting that they are coming rather close to being actually extinct in areas such as West and Central Africa in which there are only 400 remaining and on a larger scale only 20,000 on the whole continent. While 20,000 could seem like a lot to some people it is worth noting that according to Conniff the population is “down from 200,000 in the mid-20th century, and populations are likely to drop by half, except in southern Africa, over the next two

decades.
The main goal of Conniff seems to be to deploy this information to the readers of The New York Times and for them to take this new found knowledge and use it give a voice and create awareness for this topic. On a rhetorical standpoint, Conniff appears to attempt to employ a use of pathos in writing as he tries to invoke emotions within us and appeal to our humanity. For instance, at one point Conniff perceives the notion of an “Africa without Lions?” which he then goes on to say is unthinkable, which could bring out a sense of tragedy in somebody's mind. Another point of Conniff using pathos to invoke our humanity is near the end of the article when he notes “In truth, it is a campaign that ought to unite all of us who want some vestige of wild Africa — one with lions, elephants, rhinos — to survive beyond our meager lifetimes.” this line gets down to the very essence of who we are as people and he is trying his best to “unite” us under one cause in protecting the lions.
Conniff then takes careful care in trying to explain and set forth ways of how his audience can help this situation with which the first step being that we must put aside our wants and do our best to preserve wildlife habitats and not just for lions but for the ecosystem as well.

However, Conniff notes the only way this will ever happen is if people take action and are able to put aside the basic human urge to consume everything right now, while not leaving much for later. Conniff describes a national park in Zambia known as Kafue which brings in around $2.3 million from tourism, however, lose much wildlife to snaring. He then goes on to note that recent projections, however, claim that “the park could be making $39 million a year instead, along with jobs and benefits for its neighbors — and support four times as many lions.” Conniff attempts to make his audience feel worried about the lions by giving us all these facts pertaining to Africa and its lions in which he hopes will help solidify his attempt at getting his readers to lobby and advocate for organizations such as the UN to help with the upkeep of these national parks. Conniff maintains a strong ethos in multiple points within his argument for instance, when he talks about campaign's purpose was to unite all of us under one banner in a way connects him to his audience as he groups himself with them. Conniff also does a fairly decent job at using logos to help persuade the audience, such as on one occasion in which

he used an analysis by Rowan Martin on the National Park Kafue as a way to cement his findings. Conniff continues his use of logos later on in the article when he refers to a report by a team of Panthera scientists to the fact that many African countries will not be able to raise enough money through tax or political power to help maintain the national parks.
Overall, I believe Conniff to do a fairly decent job in his attempt of persuading the readers of The New York Times to engage in lobbying for African lions or even just spreading the word about what is going on in Africa through his use of ethos, pathos, and logos in his article.