Rhetoric Examples

Pretty good…

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/08_26/b4090055452749.htm

“The Dirty Truth about Clean Coal” uses the aspects of rhetoric to reveal clean coal for what it is. It firstly explains what the idea of clean coal is all about so that a uniformed reader can have a clear understanding of the issue. Including quotes from various sources, it demonstrates that it’s trying to get at the truth. By addressing issues from cost to safety, both things that are incredibly important to the American public, pathos is utilized. Yet the argument is not one sided and presents information about the technology in such a way that the facts for and against it can be judged by the reader. By giving statistics, timelines, figures, and facts, the reader is left with information of what clean coal is, and if it’s even clean. Quotes from government officials, including the former leader of the U.S. Energy Department’s carbon sequestration group, prove authenticity and credibility as well. Overall it’s an informative and effective article.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qKR-6Szlv0g

This video uses dramatic, almost scary music, and dark, cloudy pictures to appeal to the viewers’ emotions. By using a background of a smokestack it evokes the dirty feeling that factory emissions provokes, and demonstrates that coal is not a clean thing. It uses images of the relationship that the American Coal Council has to CNN as well as to the presidential debates, showing the bias in the media toward clean coal. Also, by quoting the New York Times and pointing to documents and transactions between ACC and CNN, the video establishes credibility with the viewer.

Not so great…

http://cleantechnica.com/2008/10/09/5-dirty-aspects-of-clean-coal/

This article titled “5 Dirty Aspects of ‘Clean Coal’” includes some aspects of rhetoric, but doesn’t use them as effectively as it could or should. While it is clearly readable, and the reader doesn’t need to devote a significant amount of time or commitment to reading it, it doesn’t really draw the reader’s attention in any sort of way. The argument lacks appeals to pathos simply stating facts and information. The various points use mostly logos to appeal to the reader as the author discusses a variety of arguments against “clean coal.” It gains some credibility by quoting studies as well as addressing the government’s actions, but does not provide citations for the rest of the information presented. The article is certainly not all bad and includes quite a bit of good information, it just is not as convincing as it could be and does not use the elements of rhetoric to the extent that it could.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x8Gy-kgL8yA

This video I would deem to be an ineffective use of rhetoric. Trying to make a catchy statement about the abundance of coal that helps the U.S. economy, it does little more than to say that the coal is becoming cleaner without supporting those statements with any reasoning. It does not give any evidence that the statements are credible, does not provide any further information or proof (logos) and does a poor (at best) job of appealing to pathos.