The magazine articles were using a mainstream language that any average person could understand the event described. The magazine authors are focused on a more typical audience, so they were written in a common language form. The article written by Elizabeth Pearson used a common English, there was no scientific jargon. The article was about the same Juno mission as the Journals, though it was easier to understand. Pearson even added the same common Jupiter information as the Journals, it was just in an easier language. The article by Nicola Twilley used the same mainstream language, there was also no jargon. It was extremely easy to understand. The language was academic but still simple, which is expected from the New Yorker magazine. Any …show more content…
Magazines want to catch your attention so the article’s authors will dramatize the story to gain attention. The credibility for magazines are at a low level in general. Though both articles used in this assignment are from well-established publishers. Pearson’s article was published in Science Focus, where adding credible sources is significant. Pearson added plenty of information from the reports from NASA. Unfortunately, Pearson did not add any outside voices. She reached her expectations of a science magazine article, but did not reach a full level of credibility because no outside voice was mentioned. All the information was just a repeat of NASA’s reports. Twilley’s article was published in the New Yorker, a very well established magazine. Twilley added plenty of sources and outside voices in her article. There was general Juno Mission information, along with information she exclusively received during an interview with a Juno worker. Added all the exclusive information and statements from the workers made this article stand out. It was not just a summary of NASA’s report. It was more and it was factual, which is fairly expected from the New Yorker. The more relevant the sources are the more the author can be trusted when writing articles. Adding good sources and outside voices are what contribute to this, along with giving credit. This is a crucial point in an article about an event like the Juno Space
It is important to understand the background of the person doing the reporting of events as it can influence what they think and say.
However, the good is outweighed by the bad in that this article has almost no factual support. Worley seems to be venting her thoughts without any outside factual support. It is difficult to label this article as effective due to the lack of any factual support and evidence to back up her arguments. That is exactly what needs to change in the article. Worley must use more sources for information to back up her points, then the article may be more convincing and worth
The most successful approaches to the public’s acceptance of scientific information are the cues from political leaders, persuasive syntax, the use of narratives, and research into a scientific source’s
It shows the different reactions of the different people and goes into great detail about the path of the comet. Because "The
Rhetorical Analysis of Florence Kelley’s Speech Florence Kelley’s address to the National American Woman Suffrage Association (1905) touches upon both the social and political aspects of the need for reform regarding child labor laws. By revealing the shocking truth about how young children around the country work for long hours in inappropriate conditions, Kelley is able to emphasize the urgency of this situation. Simultaneously, she defends women’s suffrage by presenting the logical statement that there would be laws to prevent extreme child labor if women had the right to vote; more progress could be made if women and men worked together, starting with women’s right to vote. In her address to the National American Woman Suffrage Association, Florence Kelley establishes a dramatic tone and appeals to her audience’s emotions to persuade them to advocate for a reform of child labor laws by employing several rhetorical strategies. To begin, Kelley utilizes the audience’s sense of logic to generate answers to rhetorical questions such as, “If mothers and the teachers from Georgia could vote, would the Georgia Legislature have refused at every session for the last three years to stop the work in the mills of children under twelve years of age?” and “would the New Jersey Legislature have passed that shameful repeal bill enabling girls of fourteen years to work all night, if the mothers in New Jersey were enfranchised?”
middle of paper ... ...2014. The 'Standard' of the 'Standard'. The "NASA History" Congressional Digest 90.7 (2011): 196-224. Academic Search Premier -. Web.
The New Yorker, 21 Oct. 1996. Print. The.
The New York Times. The New York Times, 15 Aug. 2013. Web. The Web.
Contextual analysis is made up of three basic components; intended audience, setting and most importantly purpose. Authors often times consider and work each contextual piece into the construction of their given argument. An argument is not powerful if audience preference is not a main concern, if the setting isn’t taken into consideration, or if the purpose is not relevant to the current situation. On January 28th, 1986 the shuttle challenger exploded 73 seconds into its take off. President Ronald Reagan wrote a critical speech to address the tragedy that had struck our nation that day.
New York Times. The New York Times Company, 23 Jan. 2010. Web. 22 Jan. 2014.
Collins and Pinch draw a distinctive line between what actually happened and the public’s perspective on what happened. The public had a compulsive desire to create a moral lesson and provide heroes and villains. Many people misconstrued this as a conflict between the knowledgeable engineers and the greedy management. The public believed that NASA and Thiokol’s managers were ignorant to the engineering, but this is not true, since they were all engineers before their promotion to management. The authors stress the phrase “after the event” to show that hindsight bias is contributing to the public’s view on what actually happened. The physicist, Richard Feynman, awed the public with a demonstration of putting rubber, the material of the O-ring, in icy water. Th...
After reading “People First Language” by Kathie Snow, the first thing that came to my mind was the saying, “Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me.” I have never agreed with this saying because words can inflict pain just like sticks and stones. Words really do matter.
" The New York Times. The New York Times, 24 Dec. 1998. Web. The Web.
Language is like a blooming flower in adversity – they are the most rare and beautiful of them all as it struggles to express itself. It blooms and flourishes in strength, awe, and passion as the riches of thought is imbibed from the seed and into a finished beauty. For others, a non-native person speaking in a language that they are not familiar with sprouts out like a weed – the way its thorns can puncture sympathy and comprehensibility. Amy Tan, however, addresses the nature of talk as being unique under its own conditions. In Tan's “Mother Tongue”, she discusses how her mother's incoherent language is “broken” and “limited” as compared to other native English speakers. When focusing on Amy Tan, she grows noticeably embarrassed with her mother's lack of acuteness in the language, which then influences Tan to “prove her mastery over the English language.” However, she soon learns from herself and -- most importantly -- her mother that a language's purpose is to capture a person's “intent, passion, imagery, and rhythm of speech and nature of thought.” With such an enticing elegance...
The New York Times, 18 Sept. 2007. Web. 15 Apr. 2012. .