Heather Mallick Analysis

714 Words2 Pages

Heather Mallick’s “Someone has to stand up for the gifted students” discusses the evilness that is the “task force” and vaguely suggests to readers that specialized schools should stay open. The author effectively appeals to authority and demonstrates the benefit of specialized schools but, ultimately her overuse of emotional appeal, peculiar tone, and ad-hominem writing style detract from the article. The effective appeal to authority compels readers to side with Mallick’s opinion. By highlighting John Malloy’s position as the director of the Toronto District School Board and displaying the fact that “he was so opposed that he has asked for the recommendation to be deleted” (Mallick, 1), Mallick encourages the reader believe in the benefit …show more content…

Overuse of emotional appeal “can sometimes come across as manipulative” (Prinsen, 2), and in the case of Mallick’s article, misuse of emotional appeal damages the article’s integrity. Throughout the article phrases such as “You can get beat up for that” (Mallick, 1) and “Who among us at some point has not cowered in a classroom” illustrate Mallick’s perversion of emotional appeal. This misuse of emotional appeal comes across as manipulative and results in readers not trusting the author which ultimately leads readers to question the article’s …show more content…

The “writer is attacking someone on a personal level instead of addressing his or her opinions and argument”. (Prinsen, 4) The author bluntly critiques the report, but not for it’s content. Mallick makes weak statements such as “The report is badly written, by the way” and describes those who wrote it as “an amorphous group with an unrivalled talent for educational jargon”. By attacking the report not based on it’s content, but it’s writing style Mallick isolates many readers. She claims that she stands up for those students, but she chooses not to use facts to support her claims. Additionally, by berating the people who wrote the report Mallick further degrades her readers’ trust. Ultimately the reader is left questioning the author’s validity because of her slanderous attacks in place of legitimate

Open Document