Assignment Sheet: Rhetorical Analysis
The purpose of this assignment is to pick a particular rhetorical message (that is, a message that attempts to persuade you to do or to believe something) and analyze the content of that message to determine the purpose, intended audience, argument, persuasive strategies, and modes of appeal that the message employs. In order to do this, I will assign you an image/video (I call it an artifact) from science/engineering
Each oen of you will to analyse this commercial:
videos are attempting to persuade a particular audience. Your goal will be to understand the basic structure of an attempt at persuasion in order to see how persuasion works. Please adhere to the following guidelines:
1) Examine/watch your artifact carefully, and identify the main claim being made.
2) Begin your paper with an introductory paragraph which overviews the main strategies of persuasion that the artifact employs.
3) Next, you will be required to write a Toulmin’s model of warranted assent diagram to explain the attempts to persuade the reader. This includes a demonstration of the major claims made in the artifact and the warrant for those claims, as well as the implied justification of the artifact’s claims. This section should be at least two paragraphs and at most four paragraphs long.
4) Next identify the intended audience for the image/video and analyze whether or not the ways in which the argument that the media makes is uniquely fit for that particular audience. This section should be at least two paragraphs long. You should write about the article’s language, tone, and style, and how these features help define the audience.
5) Then, you will critique each of the artifact’s justifications. This section should also be at least two paragraphs long. Why shouldn’t we agree with this claim? Is the justification offered a good one? What can the essay do better to be more persuasive?
6) Finally, craft a conclusion that reviews both your explanations of the justifications of the media’s position and your critique of those justifications.