Article Analysis

A) Cite at least 2 claims the author/speaker makes, and then specifically explain (in a minimum of 3 sentences) the details of each claim.

Claim 1:

Explanation:

Claim 2:

Explanation:

B) Cite a minimum of three times where the author/speaker uses data, evidence and/or examples to support the claims above, or any other claim. Then explain why this is or is not effective.

1:

Explanation:

2:

Explanation:

3:

Explanation:

C) What are 2 conclusions that the author/speaker wants the audience to draw? Explain how you logically know this or can reasonably come to that conclusion.

Conclusion 1:

Explanation:

Conclusion 2:

Explanation:

ETHOS

A) Cite at least 2 times the author/speaker establishes credibility, and then specifically explain (in a minimum of 3 sentences) how this paints them in a credible light.

1:

Explanation:

2:

Explanation:

B) Cite a minimum of 3 times where the author/speaker demonstrates their morality, virtue, or character in order to support their message. Then explain why this is or is not effective.

Demonstration 1:

Explanation:

Demonstration 2:

Explanation:

Demonstration 3:

Explanation:

C) Cite at least 2 instances where the author/speaker gives the impression of good-will toward the audience. Explain how and why the audience feels as though the author/speaker is on their side and/or views them in a favorable light.

1:

Explanation:

2:

Explanation:

PATHOS

A) Cite at least 2 responses the author/speaker hopes to incite, and then specifically explain (in a minimum of 3 sentences) each wished-for response and what is hoped for.

Response 1:

Explanation:

Response 2:

Explanation:

B) Cite a minimum of three times where the author/speaker uses emotional appeals. Then explain how they are appealing to the audience and why this is or is not effective.

1:

Explanation:

2:

Explanation:

3:

Explanation:

C) What are 2 audiences that the author/speaker is aiming to address/reach? Explain how you know this, and if you think they are effective in their attempts to do so (minimum of 3 sentences of explanation).

Audience 1:

Explanation:

Audience 2:

Explanation:

REFLECTION

In a minimum of 250 words, reflect on your chosen subject. Do you think it is an effective piece of rhetoric? Why or why not? How has it made you view things differently? What were the most powerful and/or impactful parts? Was there any part of the message that you disagreed with? If so, why? Do you think the author/speaker could have done anything better? If yes, what specifically? Why did you choose this subject, and in what ways is it important? Discuss your overall impressions and thoughts concerning your subject.

find the cost of your paper