The Thesis: The author uses a variety of techniques of ethos, pathos, and logos to convince his audience to be in favor of the plight of two sisters currently petitioning for a pardon from incarceration.
The Hook: The New York Times article “The Mississippi Pardons” by Bob Herbert, is an editorial trying to persuade the reader that the release of Jamie and Gladys Scott by Mississippi governor Haley Barbour from serving double life sentences in prison is not only an act of compassion, but morally correct and absolutely necessary.
The Story: The sister were said to have persuaded two men to a rural area outside of Forest, Mississippi in 1993 where the men were robbed by three teenagers who Jamie and Gladys knew. A total of $11 dollars were taken and no one was harmed.
Why we care: Governor Barbour has already pardoned 5 men, all with charges of murder, from their life sentences. They had all previously been a prison program that let them help out at the Governor's mansion. If he's already pardoned these men, why not the two sisters??
What rhetorical devices are at play?
Ethos:
The information in the article is not specific, with few direct quotes. This could lead to decreased credibility because of the ambiguous sources of information. Your average Joe might not car, but your average New York Times reader will. They might not really care about the issue if they don't think the information is reliable. However, the New York Times has also been described as a more liberal paper, so the readers could have strong opinions for the sisters to be released because of the type of information they are used to seeing in the paper.
Pathos:
The first emotional appeal comes in the author's noting that one of the sisters, Jamie, is suffering severely from medial problems, with both her kidneys having failed. The sisters are pleading that Jamie will most likely die in prison because of her health problems. This may strike a chord with the readers, because almost everyone knows someone with a horribly painful medical condition and knows the hardship that the situation puts you in. More people will want to root for the sisters release because they want them to have time to live before she dies.
Another well employed appeal to the emotions of the readers is the quote at the end of the article form the sisters' mother, saying, “I wish they would just hurry up and let them out. I hope that is where it is leading to. That would be the only justified thing to do.” Everyone has a mother or a mother-like figure in their lives that they respect and admire, a woman they would do anything for. By putting the mother's quote in the article, the author reaches into that sentimental pocket and pulls out a deep emotional pull that the readers feel, making them want to sympathize with the mother and help her get her children back.
The diction that the author uses make his opinion clear, and also helps to persuade the reader that there is “only one real choice.” Phrases such as “unconscionable and grotesquely inhumane,” “unquestionably committed shockingly brutal crimes,” “dangerous abuses of executive power,” and “beyond disturbing” are examples of the type of writing the author uses to make his point. These words put the situation in a “black or white” light, displaying good and evil, with no gray in between. These make the reader feel like it is their moral responsibility to favor the sisters and support them however they can. Readers that do not immediately take the sisters' side might even be criticized as cruel and without a heart.
I was interested to see that this author did not add a quote from Benjamin Jealous, the president of the NAACP who said, “It is a travesty that in the state of Mississippi, the lives of two Black women are valued at little more than 11 dollars.” I think the author did this for a purpose. To me, I feel this is a little outrageous. Yes, the sisters are African American, but I'm hoping that doesn't have a whole lot to do with the matter and is irrelevant to the case. Also, as president of the NAACP, I'm pretty sure he has to say something to that effect.
Logos:
The author readily puts forth his opinion of the matter: it's ridiculous that the woman aren't out of jail yet. He thinks of the sentence as ridiculous and says that the choice for the governor should be an easy one. He shows the ridiculousness of the whole scenario by giving us the facts that mitigate the involvement of the sisters in an order that starts with the main idea, showing the big picture, getting us on the sisters' side, then filling in the details, which only add to the sisters' case.
Another appeal to logic is the governor's track record – he's already pardoned 5 convicted murderers. Why then would he have a problem releasing two middle-aged women who were only accomplices to the robbery? It also brings up a point of controversy that further weakens the governor: all the pardoned men had been in a program that allowed them to wor in the governor's mansion. This bit of information leaves us to wonder whether the governor pardoned them for aboveboard reasons.
The juxtaposition of the sisters' double life sentence to the sentence of the teens who actually robbed the victims (2 years) serves to further the authors point that the sentence placed upon the sisters is ridiculous and that it should be rescinded as soon as possible. In my opinion, the author is so against the sentence placed upon these sisters, that after the governor has pardoned the sisters, he should make them homemade cookies and write an apology letter as well.
The way the information in the article is presented is a logical appeal in itself. After the first paragraph, the odds are already stacked in favor of the two sisters. We are already in the rhetorical clutches of the author, who has set up his article in the best way possible to keep our interest and our opinion in his plan; he reels in his readers by telling them the obvious solution, then uses supporting information to back it up while subtly attacking the opposing side of the situation. This grabs the reader from the start and doesn't let them go until they are thoroughly convinced of the author's opinion and hold it as well.
The Verdict: The author did a great job using rhetorical appeals to convince his audience, the readers, and an even broader audience of average people, to side with the incarcerated sisters in their petition for a pardon. Despite the authors use of ethos by giving ambiguous information could be possibly detrimental, his use of pathos and logos more than made up for it. The emotional appeals of reader association and diction were used effectively to make the audience feel connected to the sisters and their plight. The logical appeals of organization and background information serve to satisfy the intellectual reader by bringing up new points proven by fact to help further the argument. I'd say the article is effective because, hey, I'm convinced.
No comments:
Post a Comment