1. Why are we still debating climate change? - CNN - Carol Costello
Author:
Carol Costello is an Emmy-award winning reporter who graduated from Kent State University and is currently the CNN Newsroom anchor from 9am-11am. She is a part of the news bureau in New York where she has reported on a significant amount of nationally recognized events such as the Boston Bombing Marathon and the Gulf Oil Spill, won her Emmy in 1991 as part of a story on crack and cocaine, and was nominated for another Emmy in 1993. Her reporting background is incredibly comprehensive and she has many presidential interviews and years of reporting behind her.
Carol Costello (2015 May 28) "Why are we still debating Climate Change?" Screenshot from my computer - 9/26/2015 |
Audience:
This article is being addressed to a sympathizing liberal audience but also posing a question to the conservative audience. The title is a direct question, in an attitude of disbelief, over the tone of the general public. The content of the article, however, outlines the actual facts about the population demographic, which suggests she wants those who believe climate change exists to read this information. This information means little to those that do not believe in climate change, but to those who believe the science, this is shocking information. Thus the point of this article is to appeal to passionate anti and pro climate change advocates and display information about the current climate. It's almost as if she wrote the opinionated article to understand the issue herself, which is also a great tactic to relate to her audience.
Context:
This article was published in May well before the Pope speech, but makes note that such a speech would occur sometime in the future. She is using a relatively informal language to inform a large audience about the current demographic. The article is a compilation of quotes and information about the size of the climate change naysayer portion of the population. Her purpose is to answer the question of why climate change is still a debate. She does this by addressing the attacking group on the scientific side of the argument, which is guaranteed to rile up conversation.
2. Pope's Full Speech to Congress - NY Times - The Associated Press
The Pope is an internationally known religious figurehead of the Catholic church. He currently lives in the Domus Sanctae Marthae in Vatican City. He is the 266th Pope and an avid speaker for Christians the poor, and as of this week climate change. This is a speech coming directly from his speech to the Congress on the 24th. His word has the power to influence a large population of the Catholic following who is wholly devoted to him. His speech has authority to the point of being able to change the tone of the Paris climate talks and the social climate on the environment.
The Associated Press (2015 September 24) "Pope's Full Speech to Congress" Screenshot from my computer 9/26/2015 |
Audience:
The pope has written an encyclical called "Laudato si", addressed to all of the bishops of the Roman Catholic church, in which he champions recognition of climate change and demands sustainable practices. He touched on the issues of this encyclical on his speech tour with the goal of touching the entire world. His most direct audience is the Catholic community, but his speech adamantly proposes change to the whole of the US and even the actions of the UN.
Context:
This speech is a part of a massive speech tour for climate change and policy from the Pope. This surprise green ally is meant to be incredibly public. Quotes from the pope have covered every minor and major news source, all social medias, selfies and all, and have considerable splits in the Conservative parties are around the world.
3. Conservatives Dismiss Pope on Climate Change, Warn of Immigrant 'Anarchy' - Huffington Post - Jennifer Bendery
Author/Speaker:
Jennifer Bendery has been a reporter at the Huffington Post since 2011 and is currently in the position as the White House Correspondent and congressional reporter. She resides in Washington D.C. and is very active on her twitter page which leans towards being rather liberal. She is an active reporter, her past articles being on Kim Davis and the award she received from a Conservative group. Rep. Tim Huelskamp is the openly Catholic Republican Representative for Kansas who Jennifer Bendery quotes in the article.
Jennifer Bendery (2015 September 26) "Conservatives Dismiss Pope on Climate Change, Warn of Immigrant 'Anarchy'" Screenshot from my computer 9/26/2015 |
Audience:
This article is a demonstration of those who disagree with climate change and are admitting to struggling with the Pope's words. The audience is both liberal and conservative, as this is entirely almost entirely an article of quotes and has little bias from the author. Her being a congressional reporter, it is her job to present the opinions and actions of the US representatives to the public. People of all political and religious stances are the intended audience.
Context:
This article is written by a congressional reporter and is almost in the format of a direct interview with Huelskamp. The article presents the current confusion and angst in the Conservative party over their opinions on climate change and another issue discussed by the Pope, abortion. Due to the Pope having nontraditional views on climate change, gay rights, and a variety of other issues, this adaptation in the Catholic faith will be a rocky road. Although the Pope is still set on the traditional on topics like abortion, this sudden change is going to have a dramatic and entirely unknown effect on the population.
REFLECTION:
After reading Chloe and Sam's blogs, it was interesting to see what kind of articles we all decided to pick. I originally picked a few more scientific than opinionated pieces, similar to what Sam picked, and changed my plan half way through. She was able to find a nice balance of information and personal stories to a pretty intense issue. Chloe found three very detailed and interesting sources with a wealth of information about audio books from the writer, narrator, and a writer involved with finding audio talent. She definitely has a lot of different options for directions she can go on her project, but any of her articles are great options.
In terms of my own analysis, I think I found some good starting point articles, but I will be picking an alternate article about the Pope to be the base of my project, instead of using the entire speech. There are still dozens of articles being spewed out into the internet on the topic, and I have found a few other options that more directly fit what I would like my project to focus on. I think the articles I chose for this particular blog are still perfectly fine, and they were definitely useful in determining my project. I was also pretty happy with my analysis, so I will continue to move on to the other blogs.
All three of the texts you've chosen seem to be very opinionated! However, I believe the one on "Why are we still debating climate change?" is probably the weakest for a rhetorical analysis. The author structures her argument very well, using facts to support it, but I believe there are better choices. Quite honestly, I didn't feel like listening to a 50 minute speech, so I'm not sure how powerful that argument will be. However, based on the reverberation of the Pope's speech, I think this has the strongest and most compelling rhetorical situation. Pope Francis is known for having a significant impact on the topics he addresses, and he is a major religious figure, so this seems like the best choice to me. I'm really looking forward to see how this develops, especially since we have the tendency to be drawn towards the same topics. Good luck and happy blogging!
ReplyDeleteHi Mira. I can see you have done your research. I enjoy how the first video contains a good deal of information not just in the text but includes the video as well. It gives an appealing visual aspect to the text provided. I agree on Chelsea's comment on the pope's speech. A 50 minute argument is hard to listen to after a while and the point can often get lost after a certain period of time. Or people don't stick around long enough for the full point to be made.
ReplyDeleteI would also not say that the Huffington post article posses good points on the argument. Rep. Tim Huelskamp didn't seem to support his claims with much evidence other than the fact that global warming does not have scientific evidence. And it seems he gets off topic a lot too.
I would take information from the Pope though since he seems to be more of the center of the topic along with global warming. Although is is not much of an expert on the topic in my opinion, he does hold a lot of power and influence over the people.
This is an interesting angle though to come in on global warming and I hope it continues to progress well!