When finding an argument to analyze, I looked to the Chicago Tribune, and flipped to the Editorial section. I immediately was drawn in by the article, "China's Milk Problem". The author wasn't listed, but it's published by Tony W. Hunter and edited by Gerould W. Kern. This article describes a problem going on in China at the moment, thousands of babies becoming ill and even being hospitalized due to the chemical Melamine that has been added to baby formula. I found this a very good argument, backed up by sufficient evidence.
The editorial makes the claim that the Chinese government should have acted sooner, ending with the powerful line "What a shame that it took the lives of children to force the governors there to pay heed to the governed." I had a difficult time finding ethos in the article having no author to go from, but the opening line develops a little trust with some background information, "China's rulers have long tried to control the flow of information withing their borders". Although not amazing, the fact that the author seems to know what he or she is talking about helps his or her ethos. The article immediately moves on to provide strong logos, with the facts that "Melamine that was added to infant formula in China has sickened 53,000 babies there. Nearly 13,000 had to be hospitalized. Three have died." These cold hard facts prove that their is clearly a problem in need of help.
I found plenty of pathos in the argument, mainly with the picture planted right in the middle of the article, forcing you to look at it. The picture is of a Chinese baby crying, which pulls at the heartstrings. The line "Grieving parents demanded to know how the government could have permitted such substandard construction", also proves pathos when it reminds the reader of everyone who suffers from the issue.
The main problem I found with this article was that there was no real connection to the reader, but in my opinion the logos and pathos made a strong enough statement not to really require a strong reader/author connection. The author also doesn't seem to have a specific audience, which in this case is a good thing, because nobody feels restricted from reading it or that it doesn't apply to them.
Overall, this argument was very strong, including at least a little of ethos, pathos, and logos, and thoroughly convincing. By the end of reading I was ready to fly to China to help with the problem! If anything, the author should have done more to establish themselves with ethos, proving that they should be believed about the topic.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
I completely agree with the fact that having no author to identify with gives the argument weak ethos. I think this was a mistake on the author and publisher's part, because they article sounds very well written. People like you who enjoyed this article might want to look at other articles the author has written, and this would increase his/her popularity.
Also, I think the author could have better connected with the audience by clearly addressing the parents. Most parents read the news, and parents with young children will feel very upset to hear about kids being hospitalized due to the government. Parents love their kids, and the author should have used this to make people want to get involved in stopping the milk problem. The use of the picture was a very good idea, because pictures provide emotion and evidence that words cant. A parent could look at the picture of the sick child and think, "What if this were my child? Babies should not have to go through this!"
Post a Comment