RA #7

For the rhetorical analysis on a movie trailer I chose a new movie that is in the theaters right now called Body of Lies. The target audience for this trailer is probably all Americans but it definitely appeals much more to adult men more than anyone else. I came to this conclusion because almost the entire trailer consists of action shots and things being blown up, which are things that men tend to like. I would definitely say that I am part of the target audience. The argument for this trailer is obviously to come and see the movie because it is awesome. The argument in this trailer is being made mostly through pathos because it appeals to men’s emotions by showing lots of cool action shots that guys like to see in movies. It also appeals to our emotions with the music. The music is exciting and upbeat and definitely makes you feel like something cool is happening. Also, the argument is made through ethos because of the big time actors that appear in this movie. Russell Crowe and Leonardo DiCaprio are two very good and highly respected actors and are two of my actual favorites. I think that most people would agree that having both of these actors in the movie would make it very hard to not be a good movie. I think that this movie trailer was very effective because being part of the target audience it really makes me want to go and see it. It is very well designed and put together and has some really cool lines and scenes that makes it very appealing.

RA # 6

For the encounter RA I will be analyzing a sales experience that my wife and I had with a car salesman at a mazda dealership. We drove up in my 2006 civic and started to look at the new Mazda 3 series that they have. The salesman quickly appeared and started to inquire about our interest in a new car. His audience of course was me and my wife but to be even more specific, he definitely treated us like a new married couple with a tight budget. However, he treated us with a decent amount of respect and interest. His argument of course was that his Mazda 3 was our best option in terms of quality and price. He quickly compared his car to many other competitors and stated the specifications that were highly superior to the other cars in its class. He used a variety of techniques in order to persuade us to buy the car, which I am actually very familiar with because I have been in sales for a few years now. He definitely appealed to logos in that he described why the Mazda was a better choice by identifying its strong points and the weaknesses of his competitors. He told us that the Mazda 3 was the most popular car in America right now and that many have been sold every month. I think that he also appealed to pathos when he offered to let us test drive it because he wanted us to feel the car and be able to experience how it drives. I do believe that he was effective because even though we didn’t end up buying a new car he made us feel important. He also made us get excited about getting a new car by showing us all the cool options that it had. He also showed us how we could afford it through financing or a lease. It has been interesting to analyze a sales pitch when I was the audience.

RA #5

The source that I chose to do my analysis on is taken from the official BYU evolution packet that is available on campus in the library. It is a compilation of statements put out by various first presidencies concerning the topic of evolution and the creation. The article that I will be using is a message from the First Presidency in the Christmas message in 1910. The audience is most likely faithful members of the Church that read the First Presidency messages. However, I do believe that they had the entire world in mind when writing this because it is an official document put out by the Church. The argument in this article is to set straight exactly how the Church feels about the topic of evolution. They state that diversity in opinion is in no way contrary to the Spirit and that our religion is not hostile to real science. Therefore, they are trying to get across the point that we should not be too quick to dismiss someone else’s opinion as long as it is based on real science. They also continue to say that everything that is in harmony with the teachings of Christ will be favorable to them. This article mostly appeals to ethos because generally any faithful member of the Church will believe and follow exactly what the First Presidency says. It also appeals to logos, because they are presenting very rational ideas to the members by saying that whatever is of good report, they accept. I believe that this article is effective for those that actually read it. Obviously the First Presidency cannot come across too blunt or favoring one side or the other so it may be a little vague and open to interpretation. However, it is very clear that they want us to be accepting of real science that increases our faith in God.

RA #4

The article that I chose to analyze is titled, “Obama and ’60s Bomber: A Look Into Crossed Paths.” It was published in the New York Times on October 3 2008. The audience for this article is probably those that follow politics to some degree, but I feel that it is written to those that may have a negative view of Obama because of his past associations. The author is trying to convince his audience that Obama has had a very casual relationship with the man named Bill Ayers, the man who helped found an organization in the 60’s that tried to bomb US government buildings, and that he is no way should be criticized for associating with this man. I believe that I am in the target audience in this case because I do think that Obama has some associations that should be questioned and not forgotten about during the election. I think that the author is trying to make his point mainly through logos, because he cites many different instances where they are only just acquaintances and therefore people should not judge Obama based on this association. This also plays a little bit into the ethos side of things because it is coming from the New York Times, people often tend to think that they have the authority and report true facts. I think to a degree that this article was effective. It definitely points out things that I have never heard or thought of before and makes good arguments for Obama. However, if in fact the article was geared towards people who have a negative view of Obama for this reason I don’t think it will change their mind very much. First of all, people who are conservative and disagree with Obama don’t often read the New York Times because it is a liberal paper. Also, it quotes people from Obama’s campaign, that are obviously going to say only good things about him. Overall, the article was informative and maybe to someone who is on the fence about whether or not to vote for Obama this could have helped to convince them.

Link to article:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/04/us/politics/04ayers.html?_r=1&em&oref=slogin