Jonathan Kay’s “Fare Share” has many weaknesses that make his argument not effective when writing his article. Kay’s argument talks about how Uber is stealing taxi drivers of their livelihoods and how Uber is taking over the taxi monopoly. Weaknesses found in this article was when Jonathan Kay makes Uber look bad when talking about their flashy app which seems to kind of promote it even more, and with a little more research he can find other taxi apps. To add on he seems to write it very tongue-in-cheek. Furthermore, Kay also lacks evidence to support what he says because some of his arguments are weak and basic. Another weakness would be that he left the reader wondering what he is trying to prove in his argument about Uber, he seems to be all over the place with his argument. Overall, this was a weakly written article.
Jonathan Kay talks about the flashy Uber app which is kind of silly since with a little more research online, he can find other apps similar to Uber, for example, the ride-sharing app “Lyft”. Kay’s points about Uber seems to be tongue-in-cheek, meaning that it may be understood as
…show more content…
Kay’s argument talks about the rideshare service “Uber” and how they are taking over the taxi industry. Weaknesses found in Kay’s article is when he makes Uber look bad when talking about their flashy and innovative app, which seems like he is promoting it and with a little more research, Kay can find other apps that are similar to Uber. He sounds tongue-in-cheek when writing it. Secondly, Kay is lacking evidence to support what he is trying to say in his article because his points are too weak and basic. Finally, this article left the reader wondering what is he really trying to prove in his argument about Uber since he seems to be all over the place with his arguments. Overall, this article was very weak and not
According to the interview, there was couple of things they did: one, was they provided so much detail that the Arlington Police Department started to freak out that there was jus too much that people knew about what they were doing. They go through security checks, just like an airport. This app was actually created, not for the police, but it was created for the people who would be coming to the game, and it gave the people the opportunity to see everything they needed to, or wanted to know about. Like help audiences find their parking spot and the seat might be. Also, it can help people find and compare hotels, restaurants, and entertainment events they want to look for. Additionally, people can see what is the best spot and view its 3D effect, etc. Anyway, “there is a great opportunity for people who have never been to North Texas and that would be most people who went to Super Bowl because it’s never been in North Texas before, the people who do go every year, and anything the people wants.” Said by Mr. Frank Supovitz.
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 audience is not convinced even slightly. This article is too long and has too many dry facts, many of which do not get explained well, and wobbly quotes. He makes it seem as if he is against the NSA’s abuse of power, yet he includes a stat that helps out the NSA’s cause which is confusing. He does not tell the audience what they should do with the new information nor does he include why he is writing it. The paper really suffered from a lack of pathos. There was no emotional pull at all in the article which was the reason for his ultimately boring and tiring paper.
The main points are not sufficient, strong, and well-supported. for instance, upon reading in the Washington Post the plans of manufacturers to improve the functions of appliances, he retaliates by saying, "did they ever stop to ask themselves WHY a consumer, after loading a dishwasher, would go to the office to start it?" as it can be seen, the author provided a sample situation that obviously does not portray the true purpose and value of the particular feature. All throughout the piece, he provides examples of the same nature. These failed shots at wittiness led to an ineffective elaboration of his points because, instead of clever reasoning, he unfortunately resorted to questions
I found the problem with the argument of the article was there was no set argument that was clearly stated. If there was an argument in the article it was not clearly stated and I personally did not catch onto it. Altogether this was a well written article without a clear argument.
However, when using Uber taxi services, the hassle of getting transportation to your next destination is decreased dramatically, compared to a typical taxi service. With the touch of a smartphone, people are able to order a cab to arrive at their precise location in no time at all compared to all of the other taxis. My personal experiences with Uber have been great and would choose Uber over taxis at any time. Uber drivers have offered to charge my phone, play music of my choice, and feel secure. The biggest portion of the population that is against Uber, happens to be taxi cab drivers who have lost business to the fast growing service. If taxi cab drivers would migrate to driving for Uber than their taxi, they would most likely see increases in wages as well. Unfortunately, not all cab drivers can make the transition as the cab service may be their own, or they do not have a vehicle to being transporting people (a vehicle is required in order to qualify as an Uber driver). In order to continue to grow as a community, we must learn to adapt to new technology. Many people had second thought about the internet being created, and now most people use it every
Starting with the title of the article, it is clear how Palmer feels about the practice of tipping. The title of this article is extremely direct and leaves no room for misinterpretation. The title effetely sets the tone for the article. Palmer, in his first paragraph, also demonstrates his distaste for the tipping while providing information about where tipping originated. This provides use with more information about the issue and defines his claim. His claim is a claim of policy as he
...e. The absence of counter claims to many of his arguments while being supported makes the argument suspect. Adding with that some logical fallacy errors and phrases indicating guesswork without evidence and his thesis loses further ground. Looking at the article overall the argument is semi convincing depending on whether the reader agreed with him or did not before they read the article. If coming from the same viewpoint the argument is likely effective in further convincing them, however if coming from a different viewpoint the ineffective aspects of the argument coupled with a few potentially insulting phrases are unlikely to convince the reader.
Kenneth Vogel’s Big Money explores the invasion of money into our political system. In the novel, Vogel explains one of the most important important events that is currently happening in today’s elections: donors. This, according to Vogel, has been brought on by a ruling in the case Citizens United vs. the Federal Election Commission. The result of this case destroyed finance restrictions, giving Corporations and Unions the same laws of freedom of speech as individual Americans. The novel opens in February of 2012 where Vogel sneaks into a donor banquet. As our current president, Barack Obama, gives his speech, Vogel makes a note of the President’s words. In particular, Vogel focuses on one line “You now have the potential
What are the major points of the article and why do you think they are main
In “7 Reasons Why You Shouldn’t Go to College and 4 Things To Do Instead”, Michael Price explains why students shouldn’t go to college and what they can do instead. Michael Price writes for the Huffington Post and is an entrepreneur, author, and master marketer. This article was published June 17, 2014. Price introduces the article by talking about his personal experience during his first day of college as a freshman. Price had been studying business outside of college, and found that his professors terminology of business was “flat out incorrect and in some cases totally outdated” (Price). He was angry that he was paying to be taught incorrect information. Price then goes on to introduce the seven reasons why people should avoid going to college. These reasons consist of how college
... trusted statistics and carefully worded statements did not appear as though the author was pushing excessively for his own viewpoint but instead wished to share as many factual statements so the reader could come to their own logical conclusion along with the author giving no room for a reasonable argument that he had not already approached at some point in the chapter.
Overall, the best way to write an effective argument is to use the strategies that both Kelso and Saunders used. One used some better than the other, but neither failed to present their argument. Kelso’s credibility and use of facts overpowered Saunders, whereas Saunders use of opposing viewpoints and ongoing clear stance managed to surpass most of Kelso’s methods. In the end they were both engaging articles, who have points worth reading.
The article was presenting some information about the population issue from the points of views from the library of Texas A&M CC by Micah L. Issitt who is working as freelance writer/researcher and Tom Warhol who is working as Marketing and Development Coordinator. On the other hand, the author was objective, critical and kind of angry about the issue. Because he appeared to stand to stop the issue and gives plan to control it. In addition, he was biased to be worth eliminating this issue. In general, all the information that came in the article was reliable in my point of view and well researched, because it’s from the UN. Some of it was current according to the UN like2013 and the other was old ...
Reading through the essay I felt that Bob Smietana the author was speaking as a reporter. Rather than offering his own opinion he throughout the essay presented opinions from both sides of the arguement.