Essay 2:

Rhetorical Analysis
FYC 13100 / Fall 2010 / Dietel-McLaughlin

Overview
Writers typically rely on a variety of rhetorical strategies to craft persuasive
arguments. As writers, readers, and thinkers, it is important to be aware of these
rhetorical approaches and the impact they can have on readers. In this essay, you will
develop a more sophisticated understanding of the rhetorical moves present in many
arguments by analyzing two texts in terms of how each text attempts to persuade its
intended audience.
C
The rhetorical situation: The authors of They Say/I Say are looking for sample
articles to include in the next edition of their textbook. Specifically, they are looking
for articles that demonstrate contemporary application of classic rhetorical principles.
You have been tasked with reviewing two articles that are under consideration for this
publication, and you must provide a written critique of those articles based on your
evaluation of key rhetorical concepts.

Options
The pair of texts you analyze should be argumentative, should address the same
topic, and should use some combination of rhetorical approaches to persuade an
audience. Here are some pairings to consider:

Andrew Keen’s “Web 2.0” and Lawrence Lessig’s “In Defense of Piracy”

Theodora Stites’ “Someone to Watch Over Me” and Ellen Degeneres’ “This Is How
We Live” (on Concourse)

A different pair of articles, based on your own interests (must first be approved by
Dr. Erin, no later than Tuesday, 9/14).
 Requirements

Your essay should be 5-6 pages (that’s typed, double-

spaced, 12-point Times New Roman font and in MLA
format). You must include a works cited page at the
end of your essay that includes a complete, MLA-style
citation for each article you analyze, as well as any
other sources you may use (though additional sources
are not required). Additionally, your essay should
include:
Questions to Ask* • An introduction to the controversy the texts
engage
Readers: Who are they? What • A brief description of the pieces being
are their demographics? What analyzed (including the author, title, and
are their values? What beliefs publication)
might they already have? Which • A clear, debatable thesis that makes a claim
might they already share with
the author? about the way the texts communicate (example:
While Smith provides convincing evidence to
Essay: What features of the support his argument in favor of net neutrality,
essay are most crucial? What Johnson’s superior appeal to pathos likely makes
parts are most memorable? her argument for censorship more compelling to
What parts are most confusing?
her audience.)
Author: What do you know • Clearly defined criteria on which you are
about the author? How does the basing your analysis
author attempt to connect with • Evidence from the texts to support your
the audience?
claims
Limitations: Does the author’s • Attention to counterarguments. Since your
experience limit the argument? thesis is debatable, that means there will be
How about values? What about people who may interpret the texts differently.
the larger social context? You must anticipate and respond to these
objections.
Motivation: What prompted the
• A clear recommendation to your audience on
writer to present this argument?
whether to include or not include the articles
you’ve analyzed.

DUE: Sept. 29 by 11:59 p.m. (on

Concourse)

*”Realm” strategy partially adapted from Colorado State University teaching guide at
http://writing.colostate.edu/guides/teaching/co301aman/pop7b13.cfm.