The New York Time’s article, Keeping Ebola at Bay, written by Brynn
Anderson, effectively places the blame for the spreading of the epidemic and
supports its argument for change with an appeal to ethos through factual
evidence, repetition, and slicing diction.
Keeping Ebola at Bay is an editorial
that informs the audience of what is happening with the disease and what
Anderson believes needs to be done in order to prevent more death.
Specifically, the Center for Disease Control and Prevention has faulted so
frequently that they may be the reason Ebola has became such a nauseating
thought for the average citizen.
Anderson
presents overwhelming evidence at the beginning of his piece in order to establish
his credibility before stating an opinion. He chronologically presents the
cases that have occurred already in the United States and how they have been
handled. He then states how it is connected to a mistake made by the CDC, but
does not fully present his argument. This helps his readers have an idea of
where Anderson wants from them without being fully aware of it.
Repetition
is also used to sway Anderson’s audience to his side. In the middle of his
editorial, each paragraph begins with the Center for Disease Control and
Prevention’s acronym followed by what they did wrong and should’ve happened.
This organizational technique is effective as it supports the author’s purpose with
a clear means of supporting his claim.
Anderson
also molds his diction in order to create his image of the C.D.C as the
problem. He describes their advice as “inadequate” and a thought process as “an
incredible lapse in judgment”. The connotation
brought to the C.D.C is subtle yet slicing and helps him support his claim.
Through use
of these rhetorical strategies Anderson makes a very interesting and thought
provoking argument as to who was to blame for the way Ebola has affected the
nation. He gives good reason for the C.D.C to revisit some of their previous decisions
and effectively achieves his purpose.
No comments:
Post a Comment