TOW #24: Visual Text

Drinking and driving has been a huge issue in America for many years. Due to the amount of car accidents that driving while on the influence of alcohol can cause, many car companies and other organizations have created advertisements to help discourage drunk driving among the American population. These advertisements typically have a strong appeal to pathos and a demonstration of the consequence of drunk driving. This advertisement is no exception and certainly creates a strong message against it.
       This ad uses a statistic paired with shocking imagery to show that drinking and driving is an unacceptable behavior because of the damage it brings to the quality of life of people. The statistic that this advertisement uses is that every forty-eight seconds, another person if affected by a drunk driver and becomes handicapped. That is a lot of people to become handicapped and it shows that it is unacceptable to have so many people be handicapped.  With this irrefutable evidence, this advertisement not only appeals to pathos, but also logos. Someone looking at this advertisement logically will know that drunk driving must stop because it happens to often. In addition to statistics, the advertisement also uses a imagery to show Americans that drinking and driving is wrong. The image that this advertisement uses is a handicapped parking spot. By itself the image is not very shocking, but paired with the words that a drunk driver "makes another person eligible to park here" creates shock value. The image of the handicapped parking spot makes the viewer see will happen to someone if they are hit by a car caused by a drunk driver. 
        By combining an appeal to logos and pathos through statistics that pair well with the image, this advertisement successfully achieves its purpose of making people aware of the consequences of drunk driving. By stressing how often it happens, it is very effective and makes the audience really think about the effects of drinking and driving. 

TOW #23: Why People Don’t Donate Their Kidneys by Sally Satel

Modern technology has enabled us to fix many of the ailments that had previously been a death sentence. Organ transplants are a prime example of the strides the field of medicine has made, but there is still a large number of people in need of an organ. In an article entitled “Why People Don’t Donate Their Kidneys”, Sally Satel explains the growing problem with finding donors, and offers a solution to solve it. She opens by explaining how requiring a purely altruistic donation is not enough to meet the growing demand of kidneys, citing statistics and referencing federal law. Because this was published in the New York Times, Satel’s audience is probably made up of educated adults, who would expect specific evidence to support a claim. 
      The author then proceeds to lay out her solution, which involves giving third parties the chance to provide benefits for donors. During the argument portion of this article, Satel addresses a counterargument that the law prohibits this, saying that lawmakers are not sure of exactly what the law states. She substantiates this claim by quoting The 2007 Department of Justice memo, which states that the bill in question “does not suggest any Member of Congress understood the bill as addressing non-monetary or otherwise non-commercial transfers.” Finally, Satel supports her argument by referencing Al- Gore’s call for a similar change. 
      Through her well-structured article that provided both an informative overview of the subject and a coherent plan to fix it, Satel was able to effectively argue for a change in organ donation. Because of the New York Times’ national reputation, there is a good chance that Satel will reach many people, some of whom are lawmakers capable of sparking an interest in addressing this issue in Congress. As for the rest of her audience, her sound argument will hopefully persuade some to take action, either through contacting their state representatives, or donating an organ themselves.

TOW #22: Income Gap, Meet the Longevity Gap by Annie Lowrey

The growing gap between rich and poor in America can also be seen in the growing gap between longevity. With many new political plans out there like Obama Care, can an increase of money in your bank account mean an increase of years to your life? In Annie Lowrey’s “Income Gap, Meet the Longevity Gap”, the idea that life expectancy correlates with income is defended. Lowrey uses juxtaposition and statistics to defend her position of the strong connection.          

        Juxtaposition is used to reveal the effect money can have on life expectancy. Lowrey uses two counties that are only half-a-days travel apart: Fairfax County, VA., and McDowell County, W.Va. Fairfax county has, “ample doctors, hospitals, recreation centers, shops, restaurants, grocery stores, nursing homes and day care centers, with public and private entities providing cradle-to-grave services to prosperous communities” (Lowrey), while McDowell is painted as, “Government assistance accounts for half of the income of county residents. Social workers described shortages of teachers, nurses, doctors, surgeons, mental health professionals and addiction-treatment workers. There is next to no public transportation. Winding two-lane roads, sometimes impassable in snow and ice, connect the small population centers of trailers, small homes and the occasional minimart” (Lowery).  This drastic difference between the two counties supports that the ability to make money in each of the counties differs, with Fairfax clearly above McDowell. This relates to life expectancy because, “other residents have multiple woes: “Diabetes. Obesity. Congestive heart failure. Drug use. Kidney problems. Lung conditions from the mines”. With disease running far more rampant in McDowell, it shortens the citizens lives and supports the correlation between money and life expectancy.          

        Compelling statistics are used to shed light on the growing problem of life expectancy and money. Lowrey compared the two counties life expectancies to two countries and that, “residents of Fairfax County are among the longest-lived in the country: Men have an average life expectancy of 82 years and women, 85, about the same as in Sweden. In McDowell, the averages are 64 and 73, about the same as in Iraq”. Although the populations of county to country differ, the statistic still holds weight to the hard life of living in poverty. This statistics shows that with higher income, high life expectancy follows. Along with that statistic, Lowrey also states statistics regarding the obesity rate and percentage of smokers. Health and life expectancy and be agreed on that they have a correlation as many studies have shown that health choices directly impact longevity. By comparing the ability to better life choices like doctors, healthy foods, fitness centers, smoking, etc, Lowrey shows that without access, due to lack of money, the life expectancy decreases. She supports her position that money impacts longevity using statistics.      

       Lowrey utilizes juxtaposition and statistics to defend the position that income can have an impact on life expectancy. She adds to this idea the political aspect of pushing for Obama Care because this may be able to close the gap by offering better health care access to lower income individuals. As the gap keeps widening, more solutions to this growing problem need to be set forth to balance the issue in America. 

TOW #21: Visual Text

If you are someone who watches TV, chances are you have seen at least on of Snickers' “You’re Not You When You’re Hungry” advertisements which have been airing for awhile now. They’ve created both magazine advertisements and commercials that have employed famous individuals from high-profile celebrities such as Betty White, to historical figures such as Abraham Lincoln. One ad in particular features Godzilla himself. Through ridiculous humor and stark juxtaposition, this advertisement effectively achieves its purpose of selling Snickers candy bars within the “You’re Not You When You’re Hungry” advertising campaign.

          The commercial begins with a bunch of friends and Godzilla simply enjoying themselves on a sunny lakeside beach while happy feel-good type music playing in the background, when an attractive woman walks by and waves hello to Godzilla exclusively. His friends around him then take turns giving him high-fives and congratulating him for gaining the attention of the attractive young lady. Aside from the obvious humor of a woman being attracted to Godzilla, the purpose of this scene was to paint him as someone that everyone admires, which is also the theme throughout this commercial. 

         Godzilla is then playing ping pong against one of his friends with the rest watching, and when he beats him, everyone begins cheering. Following that we find Godzilla dancing at a party while two guests comment on him saying that, “Godzilla’s actually pretty cool,” to which his friend responds, “Except when he’s hungry.” The feel-good music is then replaced with screams as commercial then cuts to a classic Godzilla scene with him destroying a city at night when one of his friends manages to throw a Snickers bar into Godzilla’s mouth. Finally, feel-good music begins to play again and the commercial cuts back to another scene of Godzilla and his friends at the lake water skiing and having a great time. 

       This commercial was successful by utilizing humor throughout and first painting Godzilla as the cool guy that everyone admires and wants to be friends with. Then it cuts to a dark scene depicting how different Godzilla acts when he’s hungry, and then after eating a Snickers bar, how he instantly becomes fun and cool again. This not only makes us want to eat Snickers because the commercial was funny and Snickers satisfies enough to even tame Godzilla, but eating Snickers will also make us likable and fun to be around.

TOW #20: Is It Right To Waste Helium On Party Balloons by Tim Bowler

In an article from the BBC News Magazine, Tim Bowler describes the increasingly limited source of helium and presents the potential issue of one day completely running out of helium. Ultimately, Bowler asks if we should be wasting this finite resource on such trivial things as balloons when it is highly valued for such uses as superconducting magnets in MRI scanners. Bowler writes that it is important to conserve and value rare finite resources but his purpose is more to inform the audience of the issue and open up further discussion on the question. 
         The article sites quotes from several scientists on the issue. For example Bowler quotes "'We're going to be looking back and thinking, I can't believe people just used to fill up their balloons with it, when it's so precious and unique,' says Cambridge University chemist Peter Wothers" (par. 7). By including the insight of a scientist, Bowler shows that he has examined the viewpoints of experts working with the issue and knows his topic. 
         He also presents a factual background on the nature of helium, that it is one of the most common elements in the universe but is quite rare on earth, and that it has the lowest boiling point, which makes it a key part of superconducting magnets. Bowler also appeals to pathos in his article by presenting a rather alarming situation. He quotes chemist Andrea Sella as saying "'But helium is unique. When it's gone it is lost to us forever'" (Bowler par. 4). By presenting a potentially scary situation, the complete elimination of a valuable, finite resource, in a dramatic way, Bowler captures the attention of the audience. Finally, defining the issue in terms of a commonly known product allows the audience to understand the connection of the issue to their own lives.
          Most people have seen those brightly colored helium balloons floating at parties and for sale in grocery stores. By showing the importance of helium for other uses, it's scarcity, and how it is "wasted" for trivial party balloons. By pointing out the importance of wasting helium, at first glance most would see it as an unimportant issue but later Bower successfully establishes his purpose because it is an issue that can resonate stronger with the audience through his examples and background information.