Olivia Gentry

RC 2001-410

Rhetorical Analysis

Recently, there have been questions about the safety and effectiveness of vaccines. This

can lead to parents choosing not to vaccinate their children, or stopping a vaccination cycle if a

side effect occurs. This is something that the popular article by Interlandi, Dont Skip Your

Childs Next Vaccine (Interlandi, 2017), is discussing. A large part of the bigger discussion

surrounding the effectiveness of vaccines is focused on the flu shot. The academic article,

Prevention and Control of Seasonal Influenza with Vaccines Recommendations of the Advisory

Committee on Immunization Practices United States, 201617 Influenza Season (Grohskopf

et al., 2016) seeks to recommend immunization practices based on research. Through a rhetorical

analysis of these articles, I aim to examine how the different articles accomplish their purpose.

Vaccines are a vital aspect of healthcare meaning the discourse surrounding them is important

and therefore makes a rhetorical analysis productive.

Overall, Interlandis article uses many rhetorical devices well in order to appeal to the

intended audience of potentially concerned parents. Credibility, or ethos, is established at the

beginning of the article and continued throughout. Examples of this include references to the,

Journal of pediatrics (Interlandi, 2017) and the phrase, many doctors and scientists

(Interlandi, 2017), not just one. This article discusses experts and studies and then proceeds to

provide quotes or paraphrases things the doctors in those studies have said. Because the author

provides evidence rather than only mentioning a vague study, this builds the ethos of the article

and its author.

 The structure of the article starts out with a long section that includes research, what

doctors have said, and then follows with sections on information that answer what could be

frequently asked questions or questions that a doctor might ask. One question that is an example

of this is, How Soon After the Injection Did It Occur? (Interlandi, 2017). This can give people

a chance to think about the answers and be more prepared for a discussion with their doctor

which adds to a feeling of control. This feeling of control is important for the target audience,

parents, who are worried about the health of their children. This worry can lead to the issues we

are seeing now. Giving parents a sense of control may help ease anxiety over whether to

vaccinate their children. It is also important that the article does not make the reader feel stupid

for being unsure of vaccines, it instead acknowledges where those fears come from and provides

refuting evidence. Attempting to give the feeling of control to the audience, parents, is the

exigence for this article. The author understands the importance of vaccines, but is also able to

understand how parents may feel and is trying to bridge that gap.

The title: Dont Skip Your Childs Next Vaccine (Interlandi, 2017) is what informs

parents that the article is for them and pulls them in. Using the phrase, Your Childs

(Interlandi, 2017), makes the issue personal from the very beginning and parents are thinking

about their child while reading the article. This is another example of pathos used by the author.

They knew they could pull on the heartstrings of the parent reading it by bringing their

children into the discussion. This could be dangerous because the article runs the risk of creating

too strong of an emotional reaction and losing its audience. However, it is resolved through the

sense of control the author establishes by bridging the gap between the importance of vaccines

and parental feelings regarding vaccines.

 The website the article is posted on, Consumer Reports, is for an independent, nonprofit

organization that works side by side with consumers to create a fairer, safer, and healthier world

(About Us, n.d.). It is an easily accessed news story that came up in a google search about

vaccine safety. This easy access includes access for the targeted audience, concerned parents.

The authors of this article want their writing to reach many parents so by publishing it on a

website they make this possible.

The academic article is very informative and specific to the influenza vaccine. The

exigence for this article revolves around the intended audience. It is part of the Morbidity and

Mortality Weekly report (MMWR) posted by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

(CDC). The CDC is one of the major operating components of the Department of Health and

Human Services [that] works 24/7 to protect America from health, safety and security threats,

both foreign and in the U.S. (CDC Organization, July 10, 2017). The CDC has established itself

as a credible organization through providing science based public health information. By

defining itself as a publication of the CDC, the article is immediately establishing ethos.

The posting of the article as a CDC publication is also an indication that it is most likely

geared toward health professionals. While many people look to the CDC for accurate

information, the MMWR readership predominately consists of physicians, nurses, public health

practitioners, epidemiologists and other scientists, researchers, educators, and laboratorians

(MMWR Publications, February 17, 2016). There are other indicators for the intended audience.

Someone interested in this topic or concerned about vaccines that is not a health professional

may find this article because the CDC is so well known, but it is very long and dense. They

would not be likely to read through the entire thing. The language is often complicated or

technical, 01617 U.S. trivalent influenza vaccines will contain an A/California/7/2009

(H1N1)like virus, an A/Hong Kong/4801/2014 (H3N2)like virus and a B/Brisbane/60/2008

like virus (Victoria lineage), (Grohskopf et al., 2016) and it is not meant to be read casually. For

the intended audience, this is not an issue. The writers of this article assume that the audience

have a base level knowledge of technical terms regarding vaccines. Also, for the CDC to

maintain credibility, they must use a certain type of language and professionalism. This is both

an issue of credibility and constraints. A health professional searching for this information may

expect both of those things and a level of technicality to understand all the facts and reach their

own consensus.

The article is broken into different categories based each topic and sections based on age.

There are statistics and numbers throughout the entire paper that create a logos based argument.

Between the 197677 and the 200607 seasons, estimated annual deaths in the United States

attributable to influenza ranged from 3,349 to 48,614 each season, (Grohskopf et al., 2016) is

just one example of this. The frequency at which these statistics occur fits with the layout of an

academic article. In the academic world, the technicalities and facts matter in order to remain

credible. This is especially important for an organization like the CDC because it is such a

widely used and trusted organization and those things are expected from them.

Both articles discuss the safety of vaccines. They also both provide resources and give

advice to close out the article. This makes sense because it is further evidence to prove each of

their points. It also allows people to look for more research or possibly have questions answered

that the articles did not address. While both resources provide advice, the types of resources are

different. The articles have different exigencies because of the different audiences. Because the

popular article is geared toward concerned parents, the primary piece of advice is to speak to a

doctor. On the other hand, the academic article is geared toward medical professionals. The type
of resources in that article include vaccine information sheets and guidance from other medical

professional organizations (Grohskopf et al., 2016). The purpose of the academic article is to be

informative while the purpose of the popular article is to be persuasive. The academic article

provides facts and statistics that an article similar to the popular one would use to turn into ideas

easily read by the average person.

The rhetorical situation in each article is another difference. The United States is seeing

diseases reemerge that people can be vaccinated for because in some cases, parents arent

vaccinating their children. This is something the popular article is speaking to. It is attempting to

reassure parents that vaccines are safe even if side effects may sometimes occur. On the other

hand, the academic article specifically discusses the efficacy of the influenza vaccine. Grohskopf

et al. (2016) states that, The viral composition of influenza vaccines must be determined months

in advance of the start of each season, to allow enough time for manufacture and distribution of

vaccine. In other words, because the vaccine must be developed in time to administer the shots,

the virus can sometimes mutate. People often take this to mean that the flu shot is useless, but

part of the articles purpose is to provide evidence counter to that belief through saying, results

from other investigations suggest that influenza vaccine can still provide some protection against

influenza and outcomes such as influenza-associated hospitalizations, even in seasons when

match is suboptimal (Grohskopf et al., 2016). The popular article is aiming its response about

the usefulness and safety of vaccines directly at the people who have the questions while the

academic article is aiming its response at professionals who will then relay the information to

concerned people.

Both articles have an exigency based on their audience, but this exigence is met in

different ways. The popular article meets the exigency of appealing to its target audience,
concerned parents, through establishing credibility based on the sources it used, using emotional

appeals to give parents a feeling of control, and posting it in location to which there is easy

access. The academic article meets the exigency of appealing to its target audience, health

professionals, through establishing credibility by attaching itself to the CDC and using logos

based language. Each article is successfully meeting the exigencies placed upon them by the

intended audience. In this way, each article succeeds in the education of those audiences with

their information.
 References

About Us. (n.d.). Retrieved August 29, 2017, from https://www.consumerreports.org/cro/about-

us/index.htm

CDC Organization. (July 10, 2017). About CDC 24-7. Retrieved September 13, 2017 from

https://www.cdc.gov/about/organization/cio.htm

Grohskopf, L.A., Sokolow, L.Z., Broder, K.R., et al. Prevention and Control of Seasonal

Influenza with Vaccines. MMWR Recomm Rep 2016;65(No. RR-5):154. DOI:

http://dx.doi.org/10.15585/mmwr.rr6505a1.

Interlandi, J. (August 28, 2017). Don't Skip Your Child's Next Vaccine. Retrieved August 29,

2017, from https://www.consumerreports.org/vaccines/dont-skip-your-childs-next-

vaccine/

MMWR Publications. (February 17, 2016). Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR).

Retrieved September 13, 2017 from https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/publications/index.html