Let's be Honest, Islam has a Problem Right Now
The Washington Post, 10 October 2014
_________________________________________________________________________________
One of Fareed Zakaria's most recent articles addresses a topic very sensitive for many American-muslims because it makes note of very scary generalizations. Zakaria begins the argument with several quotes from an author who makes exaggerations that put the Muslim world with the ISIS. To follow up and perhaps even reject the argument, Zakaria uses the idea of 1.6 billion Muslim followers, although spread out and varied. He does recognize recent terrorist attacks and their association with Islam but attributes them more to extremism. Zakaria draws sharp contrasts between inherent ideologies and misinterpreted ones. With this in mind, Zakaria refers back to the original quotations and focuses upon their faults, also making sure to give them advice for future situations.
Zakaria, in this piece, contends Maher's and Harris's most recent statements regarding Islam and a supposedly appropriate stereotype. To rhetorically analyze Zakaria's piece, I find it best to go chronologically. He provides an adamant rebuttal, beginning even within his title. His title, "Let's be Honest, Islam has a Problem Right Now," appeals to his own ethos as it demonstrates self-scrutiny and willingness to listen--it shows that Zakaria has made notes on either side of the argument. To further his rhetoric, he uses the basic statistics and quotes several credible sources, but he also uses strategies in particular. One that might stand out is the "cancer of extremism within Islam," figurative language to help visualize the point he is making. Throughout the piece, Zakaria makes several counterarguments based upon the original quotes, a form of concession-refutation. Another technique he uses actually damages his "opponent's" credibility in the lines: "Harris prides himself on being highly analytical--with a PhD, no less. I learned in graduate school that you can never explain a variable phenomenon with a fixed cause." Although subtle, he characterizes Harris as egotistical and even flawed. When it comes to structure, Zakaria's concession-refutation style dominates the article and creates its form. He capitalizes upon its advantages and reinforces many aspects of his overall appeal.
Monday, November 24, 2014
Sunday, November 16, 2014
Fareed Zakaria: A Chinese Extension of Power (3:2)
China's growing clout
The Washington Post, 13 November 2014
_________________________________________________________________________________
Fareed Zakaria's most recent post is introduced with a comparison of powers between the presence of Russia in worldwide politics and the passivity of China. From there, he leads into a very brief analysis of their inaction--the Chinese government is working with the American one to conquer the looming issue of global climate change. However, despite their agreement, Zakaria brings up the historical hostility China has held towards America, supporting the idea with several books and ideologies. He also takes note of a study conducted by the Christian Science Monitor and their view into anti-Western thoughts among Asians. With this in mind, Zakaria transitions into China's motion towards the progression of their economic prosperity, accounting for numerous organizations and renovations designed to structure financial success. Furthermore, he adds, China has been responsible for the exclusion of the U.S from several of its plans such as the "East Asia Summit" forum. Zakaria finalizes the column with a terse statement concerning a modern Cold War, a short, but powerful note to end on.
Zakaria's central contention regards China's pursuit of financial and economical superiority. Much of its support can be derived from his heavy analyses of recent actions made by the Chinese government and their goals. His methods of support utilize a fair amount of statistics. However, despite his abuse of many logical appeals, most of his rhetoric can also be seen both his appeal to logos and his appeal to pathos. At first glance, the appeal to pathos might strike a reader as almost irrelevant, but once taken into account Zakaria's exigence, it might become clearer: This newspaper, "The Washington Post," is made by an American company for American consumers. The underlying ideas behind this piece concern the U.S's inability to keep up with Chinese ambition--Zakaria's contrast inspires a sense of pursuit within Americans and even a small sense of failure.
The Washington Post, 13 November 2014
_________________________________________________________________________________
Fareed Zakaria's most recent post is introduced with a comparison of powers between the presence of Russia in worldwide politics and the passivity of China. From there, he leads into a very brief analysis of their inaction--the Chinese government is working with the American one to conquer the looming issue of global climate change. However, despite their agreement, Zakaria brings up the historical hostility China has held towards America, supporting the idea with several books and ideologies. He also takes note of a study conducted by the Christian Science Monitor and their view into anti-Western thoughts among Asians. With this in mind, Zakaria transitions into China's motion towards the progression of their economic prosperity, accounting for numerous organizations and renovations designed to structure financial success. Furthermore, he adds, China has been responsible for the exclusion of the U.S from several of its plans such as the "East Asia Summit" forum. Zakaria finalizes the column with a terse statement concerning a modern Cold War, a short, but powerful note to end on.
Zakaria's central contention regards China's pursuit of financial and economical superiority. Much of its support can be derived from his heavy analyses of recent actions made by the Chinese government and their goals. His methods of support utilize a fair amount of statistics. However, despite his abuse of many logical appeals, most of his rhetoric can also be seen both his appeal to logos and his appeal to pathos. At first glance, the appeal to pathos might strike a reader as almost irrelevant, but once taken into account Zakaria's exigence, it might become clearer: This newspaper, "The Washington Post," is made by an American company for American consumers. The underlying ideas behind this piece concern the U.S's inability to keep up with Chinese ambition--Zakaria's contrast inspires a sense of pursuit within Americans and even a small sense of failure.
Thursday, November 6, 2014
Fareed Zakaria: Edward Snowden's Second Chance (3:1)
Fareed Zakaria: Why Edward Snowden should agree to stand trial in the U.S
The Washington Post, 23 October 2014
_________________________________________________________________________________
Last week, The Washington Post brought up the cold Edward Snowden controversy and put his reunion with the U.S into perspective. Fareed Zakaria, the journalist who chose to write on the topic, introduced the piece with a recently released documentary of Snowden's background--possibly prompting him to claim such an argument. After taking into account his "crime," Zakaria questions whether or not it would be appropriate for Snowden to return and stand trial. This decision has sparked a number of heated debates all over the nation as it concerns the honesty and compromise of American courts. Zakaria draws from other sources to assert the claim that Snowden would indeed have a fair trial, which is met by the adamant rebuttal of Thomas Drake's case (another whistle blower). With such a firm counterargument, Zakaria finds evidence supporting international surveillance such as France's former minister confessing their sedition and Beijing hacking into other computer systems. To finalize the piece, Zakaria clarifies upon Obama's need to provide Snowden an open, civilian trial in the U.S. Doing otherwise would cost him his reputation and credibility of a president.
In meaning, Zakaria's column reassesses the situation of Edward Snowden, a former U.S security agent, and synthesizes an appropriate response to the "welcoming" arms of an American trial. The post relies heavily upon quotes from other sources consisting of professors, authors, and legal scholars. With this in mind, Zakaria furthers his appeal to logos with personal opinions derived from constitutional values and certain amendments. Despite his strong rational appeal, Zakaria draws credibility through his use of certain phrases. Take, for example, the phrase: "I say this as someone who believes that Snowden broke the law and should be held accountable but." Zakaria poses himself as someone who scrutinized Snowden's position and has taken many precautions in his decision. The prolonged phrase "I say this as someone who" could have easily been said through a simple "I," but Zakaria utilizes redundancy in such a manner that enhances his credibility. When it came to formatting his paper, Zakaria decided upon a rather focused (topic-wise) piece. The introduction was not lengthy whatsoever and also shows his eagerness to jump into the conflict. However, Zakaria put a heavy emphasis upon his conclusion as it plays a large role in his piece as the ultimate claim.
The Washington Post, 23 October 2014
_________________________________________________________________________________
Last week, The Washington Post brought up the cold Edward Snowden controversy and put his reunion with the U.S into perspective. Fareed Zakaria, the journalist who chose to write on the topic, introduced the piece with a recently released documentary of Snowden's background--possibly prompting him to claim such an argument. After taking into account his "crime," Zakaria questions whether or not it would be appropriate for Snowden to return and stand trial. This decision has sparked a number of heated debates all over the nation as it concerns the honesty and compromise of American courts. Zakaria draws from other sources to assert the claim that Snowden would indeed have a fair trial, which is met by the adamant rebuttal of Thomas Drake's case (another whistle blower). With such a firm counterargument, Zakaria finds evidence supporting international surveillance such as France's former minister confessing their sedition and Beijing hacking into other computer systems. To finalize the piece, Zakaria clarifies upon Obama's need to provide Snowden an open, civilian trial in the U.S. Doing otherwise would cost him his reputation and credibility of a president.
In meaning, Zakaria's column reassesses the situation of Edward Snowden, a former U.S security agent, and synthesizes an appropriate response to the "welcoming" arms of an American trial. The post relies heavily upon quotes from other sources consisting of professors, authors, and legal scholars. With this in mind, Zakaria furthers his appeal to logos with personal opinions derived from constitutional values and certain amendments. Despite his strong rational appeal, Zakaria draws credibility through his use of certain phrases. Take, for example, the phrase: "I say this as someone who believes that Snowden broke the law and should be held accountable but." Zakaria poses himself as someone who scrutinized Snowden's position and has taken many precautions in his decision. The prolonged phrase "I say this as someone who" could have easily been said through a simple "I," but Zakaria utilizes redundancy in such a manner that enhances his credibility. When it came to formatting his paper, Zakaria decided upon a rather focused (topic-wise) piece. The introduction was not lengthy whatsoever and also shows his eagerness to jump into the conflict. However, Zakaria put a heavy emphasis upon his conclusion as it plays a large role in his piece as the ultimate claim.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)