TOW #11 President Obama's Thursday Night Speech on Immigration

       On my way home from the NHS induction Thursday night, I turned on the radio and heard president Obama giving his speech on immigration. I thought to myself, 'this would be great TOW material," and I tuned in. I listened, not only as a citizen, but as an analyzer, and appreciated the rhetoric Obama used in his powerful speech. President Obama, using statistics, a logical counterargument, and a moving immigrant story, spoke to all Americans that he will fix the immigration system of America and protect the rights of immigrants, relieving them of deportation.
       After addressing the nation, Obama quickly moved on to the statistics of the situation in order to establish a basis in his argument. He recites the facts that there are ":more agents and technology deployed to secure our southern border than at anytime in our history," that "there was a brief spike in unaccompanied children being apprehended at our border, the number of such children is actually lower than it's been in nearly two years," and "overall the number of people trying to cross our border illegally is at its lowest level since the 1970s." Subsequently, he states, "those are the facts." This allows listeners to understand that these were absolute facts and it appeals to the logos of his argument. Listeners now know that there was change during Obama's presidency and that immigration reform wasn't in a state of paralysis, but it is important to make permanent change in the matter.
       Obama also excellently refutes the other side, which quells the opposing argument and builds his own. After Obama speak about his plan to allow more rights for immigrants, he immediately talks about "what it isn't." His plan "does not apply to anyone who has come to this country recently" or to anyone who might come to America illegally in the future," "it does not grant citizenship or the right to stay here permanently." Here, Obama seals off the possible holes in his argument that critics could say and disproves them. This makes Obama's argument stronger and less prone to disagreement.
        Near the end of his speech, Obama used the story of Astrid Silva, an immigrant success, to evoke the empathy for immigrants and show what an immigrant can do with their life in America. This girl moved to America at age 4 not knowing any English and "she caught up to other kids by reading newspapers and watching PBS." Her family was undocumented, so when her grandmother in Mexico, who Silva loved so dearly, passed away, Silva couldn't even attend her grandmother's funeral due to fear of deportation. "It was around that time she decided to begin advocating for herself and others like her. And today Astrid Silva is a college student working on her third degree." This powerful story shows 'the American dream' and what people can make of their lives in America, but due to the broken immigration system, a hardworking woman cannot even attend a family member's funeral. This appeals to the pathos of Obama's audience and humanizes the immigrant, creating the atmosphere for reform in immigration policy that Obama wishes to make.

     

TOW #10 (Visual Text Analysis) Why love one but eat the other?

      The highway is a great place for advertisers to send a message in the form of billboards. As drivers speed down the unchanging road, these large billboards can't help but grab drivers' attention. Usually, from my experience, most of these billboards are to sell products or tell us of an upcoming restaurant. However this billboard by the non-profit organization, Mercy for Animals, speaks for a more humanitarian cause, using cuteness and a simple layout to persuade people to be vegetarians.
       There is no doubt that the two animals on the left of the billboard are extremely cute. The large pictures of the piglet and the puppy elicit a strong emotional attachment to the billboard which allows the billboard to hook its audience and relay its message. A pink piglet with almond black eyes and a sad looking puppy with droopy ears can't help but quickly stir the feeling of drivers and bring out the occasional, "aw, how cute." The cuteness grabs the attention and moves on to its true purpose.
       Unlike some of the other visual texts I have analyzed, which require quite a bit of time to extract the purpose and devices, this billboard was simple, allowing the viewers to completely digest the message. Since drivers are at the most spending a couple of seconds on the billboard, it is necessary that the format is simple, and since Americans are bound to read things left to right because of the English language, there is a specific order to which the elements of the billboard are to be viewed. On the left are the two cute little animals and next to that is the rhetorical question, "why love one but eat the other?" Then the billboard moves on to the answer, "choose vegetarian." If you couldn't answer the question then it makes sense to choose vegetarian because why would you want to turn that cute little piglet into roasted suckling? Then on the very bottom is the logo of the organization, establishing the ethos in the matter. The simple format and the organized mixture of pathos, logos, and ethos allow the billboard to efficiently and effectively persuade its audience to go vegetarian.

TOW #9 "Obama can fight ISIS without bombs" by Sally Kohn

      The Middle East, always a region of conflict, is going through another reign of terror. ISIS, or the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria, a group composed of radical Sunni Muslims who are willing to kill their Shia brothers and other ethnicities in Iraq and Syria in order to gain geographic and political power, are creating more chaos in the Middle East. I'm sure people have seen or heard of the beheading videos of American and British journalists that ISIS releases periodically. In response, Obama has stated in his prime-time address that he will strike ISIS down with "strength and resolve", meaning military might and airstrikes. But is this really the solution? CNN writer Sally Kohn thinks not. In her opinion article, "Obama can fight ISIS without bombs", Kohn uses persuasive counterarguments and a digestible structure of her article to say, as her title states, that ISIS should not be brought down with military might, but with more diplomatic solutions.

      Kohn starts the essay with the opposing side and consistently adds the voice of the other perspective of the issue throughout her article, but she quickly and persuasively refutes the opposing side's argument which strengthens her argument since she has already acknowledged the other side. The opposing side wants Obama to "call for more extensive strikes" and even start "an invasion of Iraq". She immediately says her argument that "fighting ISIS is the wrong course of action". She then states three points that support her argument. It's difficult to argue against a side that has already acknowledged the other side, pointed out it's flaws, and configured better solutions to the problem. 

    She also structures her article in a extremely simple and digestible way in which readers can easily extract the information, thus making it easier for readers to see and understand her point and be persuaded. After her introduction and the thesis, Kohn puts three reasons why fighting ISIS with military will not work, "1. U.S. intervention is what destabilized Iraq in the first place -- and more bombing will likely make Iraq less stable", "2. Airstrikes won't destroy radical ideology, they'll make it worse", and "3. There is no direct threat to the United States". She backs up each statement with rationale and then poses the question "If bombing isn't the solution, what is?" She answers her question with four solutions to the problem: "1. Cut access to guns and money", "2. Fix Iraq's political rifts", "3. Provide humanitarian assistance", and "4. Lead a truly international response". This structure is extremely simple and with the simplicity comes her power to change people's views and allow readers to understand her side that America cannot take militaristic approaches to ISIS.

                           Obama delivering his speech about his militaristic approach to ISIS

IRB #2 Intro Post "Guns, Germs, and Steel"

My house library is filled with great books, and one that stood out to me while browsing for a new IRB was Guns, Germs, and Steel. The book's by Jared Diamond, a professor of physiology at the UCLA School of Medicine. The overall message in the book is the reasons why Europeans were able to dominate the world, which were guns, germs, and steel. I remember watching the first episode of the documentary version of the book in history class back in 7th grade at my old school in Singapore, but that was just the first episode. I can't wait to read this book. I feel like this book is going to give me a new outlook on history and society.

TOW #8 (IRB POST) Outliers by Malcolm Gladwell

      So I finally finished the book that I've wanted to read for so long, and I was not disappointed. Outliers by Malcolm Gladwell gave me a new outlook on want it meant to be successful and the process of how to be successful. It disproved the myth that purely hardwork and ambition are the key to success. Undoubtedly, a person must have these traits, but it is the uncontrollable factors in life, the time period you were born in, your race, your culture, the people and opportunities that you encounter, that allow people to be the best. In the book, Gladwell uses extremely diverse examples and a personal story in the end to prove his argument that success comes from ambition, hardwork, and, ultimately, luck.

      The examples Gladwell uses in Outliers encompass all types of meanings of success and all types of people which allows him to establish a strong foundation to his argument. Gladwell uses Bill Gates, J. Robert Oppenheimer, Chris Langan, Joe Flom, Korean Air, The Beatles, Asian ability in math, and the KIPP program, ranging from Californian computer software to New York's major law firms and England's most popular band to the rice patties of Southern China. Gladwell provides a substantial amount of meat to his argument, which, especially with this wide range of examples, is extremely persuading and difficult to disprove.

    Gladwell concludes his book with an anecdote about his own family. He talks about his mother, a Jamaican woman who married a Canadian man. But in order to speak about his mother and her life, he talks about people from way before, his great-great-great grandfather who was an Irish immigrant to Jamaica. This Irish man took an interest in a black slave woman and had children with her, and the children came out to be less black. During Jamaica's period of slavery, slaves with lighter skin would be treated better and would do less labor. Due to this, all of Gladwell's predecessors were treated better and were higher up in the societal hierarchy. Then Gladwell talks about his grandfather, a man who loved books and knowledge, and his grandmother, a motivated woman who did whatever it took for her daughter's education. His mother came from this background and had him. Gladwell uses his own story to conclude the book with the fact that the idea that acts of chance, consequences, and opportunities affect someone's life is applicable not only to the few success stories of the world, but to himself and everyone.

Malcolm Gladwell