Sunday, April 27, 2014

TOW #25: Visual Text: BMW Advertisement


Visual texts have the power to illustrate the physical evidence that written texts lack. In this BMW Advertisement, they depict the abuse of Drinking and Driving, and why it should be prevented. With the use of juxtaposition, the advertising team at BMW was able to create a coherent visual text that has a convincing central argument relating to the harmful effects of drunk driving. While this image was released within the last 10 years, the context could be anytime as there has been a rise in awareness for the prevention of drunk driving. Additionally, it looks good on the behalf of car companies if they promote current public interests such as a movement to keep the roads safer.

When first looking at the image, the viewer sees the contrast, or juxtaposition, between an actual leg and a prosthetic leg. The comparison between what we are used to normally seeing and a foot such as our own contradicts the robotic looking leg that you see someone that is disabled have. After seeing the contrasting images, you then read the text that creates irony saying that humans cannot be replaced such as car parts. This alludes to the notion that while in accidents, primarily caused by drunk drivers, the cars can always be replaced but not the damage to humans.

This creates emotional appeal to pathos, as the reader of this advertisement will now realize that the image is of someone who unfortunately was one hit by a drunk driver. The effect of the emotional appeal creates the moral obligation that is only makes sense that an innocent one should never be harmed permanently. Then of course, to reinforce the company’s message the logo of BMW is at the bottom of the page so the last thing the reader takes in is the idea that BMW supports good causes relating to driving, such as preventing the amount of drunk drivers and creating awareness.
Therefore, I believe this advertisement was effective in the way it was simple, yet in its explicit juxtaposition that illustrates two completely different ideas, the audience will clearly realize the purpose of creating awareness of drunk drivers. Nobody wants to be put in the situation where they themselves would be in danger of such individuals, thus they will join the public awareness movement of BMW and people will also buy BMW cars as they support their communities and are a company of the people.





Tuesday, April 22, 2014

TOW #24-Written Text: Want Green Cities? Lose the Cars


Eric W. Sanderson, a conservation ecologist, has had enough with cars. In his CNN article “Want green cities? Lose the cars,” he pleads to why we don’t need cars in cities. With the context being Earth Day, Sanderson states his claim that in order to have greener cities, we need to eliminate the cars within them.

In order for Sanderson to build his argument based off such a specific claim, he lists the harm of cars on our cities and also how they are detrimental to the environment. By listing the everyday nuisances when it comes to driving, the audience will eventually see what Sanderson is explaining. For example, he lists the negatives of driving such as noise, traffic, fuel costs, and so on. Therefore, the audience (mostly consisting of adults who drive because CNN is a news source for people of all ages) will now realize that they are in agreement with Sanderson because they have had at least one of these issues with cars most likely. After listing the negatives of cars and how they will prevent us from a movement to make cities “greener”, Sanderson now has to offer his plan in order to keep society functioning without cars.

The build up of Sanderson’s argument is effective in that it addresses a claim, why his claim is a necessary problem to fix, the effects it has on the environment, then completes his argument with avenues for us to investigate in order to fix the problem. The author could have simply just rambled on about how cities are not green, however Sanderson addressed an aspect of cities such as cars, and then built his argument towards how cities do not even need cars, so it only makes sense that if we limit our use of cars in regions where we have other modes of transportation, our cities will indeed become greener.

Sanderson also uses informal diction in his text when he talks to the audience on a first name basis, calling his readers “you”. When he does this it builds an audience with a common unity, people of the country who drive and suffer the negatives when it comes to driving. By uniting his audience, the text now more arguable since the readers will collectively agree that cars have a lot of ulcers such as traffic, noise, etc, and by eliminating them we can also make our cities greener. Sanderson’s text was successful in arguing its claim as it strategically builds the argument from an idea to why it needs to be changed and finally the way we should go about changing this; he essentially provides his audience with the full package of his idea. 




http://www.cnn.com/2014/04/21/opinion/sanderson-earth-day-cars/index.html?hpt=op_t1

Monday, April 21, 2014

IRB Post- Killing Lincoln: The Shocking Assassination that Changed America Forever

For my final IRB I have selected a nonfiction text that has been heavily focused on in my AP U.S. History curriculum, Killing Lincoln: The Shocking Assassination that Changed America Forever . This text focuses on the Lincoln Assassination, however I will be interested to read this because of the central argument that you can pick up on from just reading the title. While the assassination obviously was devastating, I think it will be unique to interpret the argument to how it changed our nation forever. Therefore, this book will not only convey the historical aspects of the assassination, but use evidence to support their argument to how important this moment was to the development of our nation post Lincoln presidency. It is also assumed that this text will use a "rewriting history" approach where they will predict what would have happened if Lincoln were not killed, and all of the other possibilities that could have happened. I found this book online when looking for a possible IRB, and due to its rating and reviews I think it will be riveting to read an argument text (after we have finished the unit) and tie it to something that I have already learned in another class. Additionally, since this book is fairly new (2013), I think it will be a great recommendation for history enthusiasts such as myself if I really enjoy reading this text.