http://www.pbs.org/kcts/videogamerevolution/impact/myths.html Logos Jenkins, Henry. "Reality Bytes: Eight Myths About Video Games Debunked." PBS. KCTS Television. Web. 5 Sept. 2015. . a. What is the central message of this text? Please explain it in your own words. The central message of this text is that video games are not a cause of aggression in youths, and that using them as a scapegoat is only masking the real issues. b. How would you define your position as an audience member (resistant, neutral, etc.)? With your own position in mind, what kind of audience do you think the author is trying to reach? Please provide an example to support your answer. My position regarding this issue would be sympathetic. I grew up playing video games …show more content…
What appeal(s) are being used in this text (ethos, etc.)? Give a specific example from the text to support your answer. The author primarily appeals to the audience using logos. He brings statistics and data from research studies throughout the essay. He either provides background information on why the studies are misleading or just presents a fact. For instance, “According to a 2001 U.S. Surgeon General 's report, the strongest risk factors for school shootings centered on mental stability and the quality of home life, not media exposure” (Jenkins, “Reality Bytes: Eight Myths About Video Games Debunked”). He provides data like this through the essay. He is strongly trying to appeal to the audience’s sense of logic and …show more content…
What is the central message of this text? Please explain it in your own words. The central message the author is trying to convey is that the rapid scanning of information we do on the internet negatively effects our intelligence. Also he would like everyone to be aware he is writing a book that you can buy. b. How would you define your position as an audience member (resistant, neutral, etc.)? With your own position in mind, what kind of audience do you think the author is trying to reach? Please provide an example to support your answer. I would consider myself neutral on the matter, I haven’t put much thought or research into this topic before reading this article. I believe that the author is trying to reach an older audience, people who were wary on the internet in the first place. That audience is looking for other people to reaffirm their opinions with, which this article might do for them. The tone of the article makes it sound like he’s talking to his peers, at the time this article was released, Nicholas Carr would’ve been fifty years old. In addition to that, the publication that published the article has an average readership age of 39-61 years
Audience (Who was the audience for this work? What evidence from the author’s writing leads you to this conclusion?)
Judy blume use these Rhetorical Strategies in a virtuous way to guide her audience threw every thought process every emotion in the article , every thought that makes you think and reflect on what you just read and how it makes you feel and see society has what it really is. Blume article is really well write, she knows what say that is not to over the top to come off bitter and rude against the censors. blume is asking us to re think the way in which is when something is unknown and controversial to us, that we would shy away but instead, take it head on and embrace it immerse our self’s in it and explain it to our younger generation and educate them on the unknown to so can bark on their own quest and expand their minds.
...the narrator and all people a way of finding meaning in their pains and joys. The two brothers again can live in brotherhood and harmony.
What is the message the author is trying to convey? How does (s)he convey this to the reader?
Naylor’s audience is the committee and members of the audience, including his young son. Naylor is defending a controversial idea with controversial evidence and support, whether it goes against what he believes or not. Naylor’s own morality is called into question. Logos, pathos, Kairos, and ethos, the mainstays of rhetoric, can all be found throughout Naylor’s defense. Rhetorical fallacies can also be found throughout the sequence.
Rhetorical Analysis: “Is Google Making Us Stupid” In composing “Is Google Making Us More Stupid” Nicholas Carr wants his audience to be feared by the internet while at the same time he wants his work to seem more credible. Nicholas Carr uses many different types of evidence to show us that we should be scared and feared, as well as his credibility. Carr’s audience is people who think like him, who find themselves getting lost on the internet while reading something, someone who is educated and uses the internet to look up the answers to questions or to read an article or book. From the beginning of Carr’s article, he explains that the internet itself is making “us” more stupid. Carr talks about how his mind has changed over the years because of reading and looking things up on the internet.
He states how he used to spend hours reading, but his concentration started to drift after two or three pages. He backed up his theory with stories from others who say they’re experiencing the same thing. But they still await the long-term neurological and psychological experiments that will provide a definitive picture of how the internet affects cognition. After a brief history lesson, Carr starts to incorporate Google into the article. He tells us about Google’s history and their mission. Carr states how Google, and the internet itself, have a financial stake in collecting the crumbs of data we leave behind. Apparently these companies do not want us reading slowly or for leisure. Carr then ends the article by stating that we are turning into robots ourselves, and that we are relying on computers to mediate our understanding of the
The author attempts to build a focus around the importance preserving our mind, he writes, “But it’s a different kind of reading, and behind it lies a different kind of thinking—perhaps a new sense of the self. ‘We are not what we read…. We are how we read’ (395). Provided that Carr focuses on the safeguarding of our minds his intentions are to appeal into an individual’s emotion and bring them to the conclusion that if we continue to let the internet distract us we will lose our self’s. He recognizes that when speaking of an individual’s self they are mindfully more open to accepting what you tell them and he uses this as another one of his writing strategies. Nicholas Carr writes, “As we are drained of our ‘inner repertory of dense cultural inheritance,’ Foreman concluded, we risk turning into ‘pancake people—spread wide and thin as we connect with that vast network of information accessed by the mere touch of a button.”’ (399) by adding this statement within the essay, he is drastically appealing to a reader’s emotion. The conclusion drawn from this claim triggers the reader’s need to defend their identity consequently these emotions triggered by possibilities help the reader give into the authors argument. The author appeals to the audience’s emotion by encompassing their sense of true self and
An examination of videogames in popular culture is a complicated one. There is a large debate as to what is the very first video game. The supposed earliest known video game was created by Thomas T. Goldsmith Jr. and Estle Ray Mann on a cathode ray tube in 1947. The game was a missile simulator similar to radar displays from World War II, and overlaid sheets of paper were used for targets since graphics were unknown at this time. On May 5, 1951, the NIMROD computer was presented in Britain. It used a panel of lights for its display and was used to play a game called “NIM”. Later, in 1952, Alexander S. Douglas made the first compu...
What in the speech, if anything, suggests the speaker (or his speech writers) had analyzed the audience and adapted the speech to its needs? In the speech from what I have observed suggests either the speaker or the speech writers made it their main objective to entice their audience - meaning to speak on the main
The audience is “the person or persons whom the speakers’ words are addressed” (Longaker & Walker 11). Just as there are two kinds of speakers, there are also two kinds of audiences, the intended and actual. Milbourn’s intended audience, or who this video was specifically directed to, is the people who do not support physician assisted suicide and euthanasia. Milbourn made this video in an attempt to persuade this audience toward her views to support physician assisted suicid...
The first passage is a chapter titled Legacy, is about living life, specifically about how one lives and has lived their life, and what one leaves behind when they are gone.
...She writes of the type of person that one can only hope exists in this world still. The message of her writing and philosophy is contained in a single phrase from the novel: “I swear by my life and my love of it that I will never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for mine,” (731). This is an inspiration, awakening an inner voice and drive that impels each person to do their absolute best. It implores the soul of the reader to awaken, to become the ideal of the human spirit, and to rise until it can rise no higher. It is a call to anyone with reason, anyone with the strength to be an Atlas, and it is reminding him or her of their duty to live up to the individual potential. For as long as there are those who would hear the message, there will still be hope for mankind.
“On Tuesday, November 2, while the rest of the country was voting, the Supreme Court of the United States heard oral arguments in Schwarzenegger v. EMA, the landmark case in which the state of California is petitioning for the re-instatement of a California law banning the sale of deviant or morbid violent video games to minors” (Macris). This case is a current example of the opponents of video games trying to prove video games are a bad influence on children and teenagers. Violent video game opponents have always tried to disprove the positive effects of video games. They also have been known to make up and mislead with tales of terrible side effects. This essay will prove to the reader that many of these various statements against video games and their creators are false. Contrary to opposition arguments, video games actually present benefits to gamers by reducing stress, providing entertainment, and helping to develop motivation that could not otherwise be achieved through conventional means.
Playing video games does not cause violent behavior. Don’t get me wrong, some video games show horrific acts of violence. “A recent survey found that 92 percent of U.S. kids--ages 2 to 17--play video games, and their parents bought 225 million of them last year to the tune of $6.4 billion.” (Sider 79).What’s here to argue is that violent video games do not cause violence among children, but the blame for violence should be on the individual and people who should have taught the individual better. If kids are not able to see the difference between reality and fantasy, then they really can’t be blamed for committing acts they see in a game and then imitating, not fully understanding the consequences of doing it in the real world. Parents should be the overall deciders of what they want their children playing, watching, and doing. Being left with the right to raise their child in their fashion, parents should find out what the child is playing and limit or restrict them, so then parents can’t blame anything on video games if their kid commits a violent act. With video games as the new part of our pop culture, many adults find it hard to understand why children would want to spend so much time playing with these “idiot boxes”. With this lack of understanding comes fear, for, as humans, we fear what we do not know. So all that will come of this cycle is people will continue to play video games, something new in our pop culture will come and replace video games, and it will be radical for our pop culture and taken on as the root of all evil due to lack of understanding.