Rhetorical Analysis proposal

The issue I have chosen for my Rhetorical Analysis is Colin Kaepernick’s refusal to stand during the national anthem and why this is such a social issue. The stance that Colin has chosen to take sends a very strong message and there is a lot of dissent on many social media platforms and news outlets. The uproar on Twitter and Facebook has proven that society will not be silent. Many of the new outlets have done report after report viewing it from multiple sides of the story. I like that the story has multiple avenues to it and that each one has numerous sources. I chose this subject because while I feel strongly in my own way about the issue, I am also interested in researching what delivery methods are used to persuade others of this topic. Are they effective? Do they try to sway readers in favor of Kaepernick or against? In regards to sources, the more informal sources like Twitter or Facebook cover various personal opinions like how this is a violation of patriotism and the first amendment right, while the news outlets and sports journals cover a more critical voice over Kaepernick’s choice. I would like to do more research on why this is a violation and why other’s feel so strongly opposed to Collin’s opinion. The research I did initially about the subject yields to Twitter feeds and more informal sources since they generate more hype than others. Other mainstream sources like Buzzfeed and major news outlets showed a more in depth look into the situation but still only touched the surface. My hope for this piece is to delve deeper into more scholarly writings and to see how effective they are in pleading the case or persuading against. I also want to know why Twitter and Facebook are more worthy of critical attention while sports journals are read by select few and go relatively unnoticed. 

A Response to Amanda Hess' Why Women Aren't Welcome on the Internet

In her article titles Why Women Aren’t Welcome on the Internet, Amanda Hess describes the hostile and abusive environment in which women live, work, and connect on the Internet. She details out many key stories and credible legal accounts of stalking, harassment, and degrading comments directed towards women. Hess also includes her own personal confrontation with a stalker throughout her piece, using her story as a supporting text to her argument.

The tone Hess uses throughout her piece is very matter-of-fact, as well as disengaged. Her purpose is not to make others feel sorry for her or for the people she writes about. The intent was to bring awareness to the issue women face of abuse online, and to do so by bringing factual examples and credible stories to the table. Hess clearly does her research and quotes from many sources such as Nathan Jurgenson, a social media sociologist, Danielle Citron, a University of Maryland law professor, and from well-known celebrities like Jessica Valenti.

The timeliness of the article mixed with the appropriate intended audience makes a convincing argument. Hess refers to modern day technology such as Twitter and online stalking or bullying, which highlights who her intended audiences are as well as making it relevant. She also criticizes the police agencies and other law enforcement for not being technologically aware, or up to date. Hess also brings up an important point by showing how the laws themselves are just as ineffective at protecting people against cyber bullying and harassment.
The purpose of this argument was not to complain about the unfairness of the Internet towards women, but to state facts and inform others about the perils of the everyday Internet use by women. Hess does this through a carefully constructed argument that ties personal accounts with facts and research. The use of the strong language in the beginning of her piece is shocking yet necessary. By including the original messages sent to the women, it brings a humbling sense of reality to the argument. Hess does not try to down play the seriousness of the threats which dozens of women receive every day.

Critical reading of The Loneliness of the Interconnected by Charles Seife

From the very beginning Charles Seife lays out the foundation for how information and access to that information has changed over the years, in his article The Loneliness of the Interconnected. While the accessibility to information has changed in numerous ways, the way people interact with information has not. Seife is very critical of the Internet, which he considers to be the fastest way to gain access to information. The main argument the author makes is that people have become so isolated to one idea, or piece of information, that they are not being challenged. The Internet acts as a form of complacency, into which multiple ideas all over the world turn to the extreme and gain mass followings. While Seife’s opinion is made loud and clear, he does so in a mild manner. He lists many examples, both historical and modern to catch the reader’s interest. He intersperses amusing lines in between the examples to create a sense of camaraderie and understanding between the article and reader. Seife uses a few controversial examples yet he directs the focus towards how it relates to his argument versus letting the focus be shifted off topic. As in the case of Dorothy Martin the point was not express disdain or to show how ridiculous her theories were, but instead to show how people shelter themselves with information that has never been challenged. He also creates a strong flow between examples and his argument, and there is little break to distract the reader. Seife appeals to the logical reasoning of his readers, versus an emotional plea. He favors facts instead of personal examples, thus creating a sound argument. The length of the article also plays an important role in aiding Seife’s argument. By implementing a longer piece, he can create sub-arguments to strengthen the original. These sub-arguments give the reader more to consider the truth behind Seife’s words. Because of sound logic and many facts, Seife carries a strong voice. The article holds a fairly neutral tone throughout the entire piece. Its message is simple and concise, which is to encourage readers to challenge their ideas and beliefs more rather than blanket themselves with unchanging idea and information.