Considering Types

This blog post discusses the type of argument I am considering for my project.

"Dogs Arguing." 10/30/15 via Pets Fans

The argument that I will most likely be using for my project is a position argument. I will be evaluating the basis of the Tour de France controversy involving Froome, and will be giving information that will support a side that I am arguing for.

Mixed into this argument will be refutation, which will argue against certain views. This is because I am taking different sides for different situations of the controversy, and must explain why the other side is less valid.

The arguments that I will not be using, and that are not as useful, are casual, evaluative, and proposal arguments. This is because the basis of these arguments revolve around providing a solution, which I will not be doing. There is no solution to the issue I am discussing, merely sides to be taken and positions to be defended.



After reading Chris and Austin's posts I realized what a wide variety of arguments people will be using in their projects. Ultimately there is no right or wrong answer for what type of argument you chose, it just depends on your personal approach and style, and your topic of choice. Everything is dependent on fitting your argument to your goals and purposes, which leads to different results for each person in the class. Also, I think that 2 or 3 types of arguments is a perfect number, that will give me and my peers enough content, but not too much to think about.

My Rhetorical Action Plan

This blog post includes a discussion of my plan moving forwards in relation to audience, genre, and reactions.

"Green Action Plan 2010." 10/30/15 via Riverside Public Utilities

Audience:
1. My audience will, for the most part, have general knowledge regarding the context of the controversy. Most of them will have preconceived ideas and beliefs about Froome's situation, and I will have to change some of their minds.

2. The primary values at hand are honesty in the sport of cycling, and the rights regarding public availability of data, as well as the protection of personal data.

3. I think the primary research for persuading my audience revolves around data. Numbers don't lie, and having research that can definitively say one thing or another will be extremely useful in crafting an argument and supporting it.

4. Displaying this data visually with graphs or video will be far more effective and easy to understand than just words on paper.

5. My audience primarily be interested in my argument for resolution, as much of what was written about Froome after the controversy was mere speculation. For this reason I am trying to convince them of a certain belief, and they can use this information in any way they see fit.

Genre:
One genre that would be effective is a power point presentation with text and visuals.

These examples are the best I could find of powerpoints with supporting text. Although these powerpoints are more contextual than argumentative, they gives a good idea of the genre.

1. The function of this genre is to balance a combination of visual communication with supplemental and explanatory text. The argument will be communicated through the text, and supported with visuals.

2. One of the struggles with this genre is I see it in more of a classroom or live presentation setting. Simply reading data from a power point is not always effective without live explanation, and attempting to explain through text does not always work. However, with some work, I can see this outside of a classroom or live presentation setting, being used as more of a visual guide for the audience to read.

3. This genre would suit logos and pathos very well, as visual statistics and explanations are straightforwards and logical, and proper use of imagery can effectively provoke strong emotional reactions.

4. As mentioned above, this genre will utilize visuals such as graphs and provoking images to strengthen the argument.

5. This genre will attempt to balance a conversational and academic style and tone. Depending on the accompanying visuals, I will either be conversationally appealing to emotions, or academically using logic to support my argument.

Another genre that would be effective is a video with data footage, images, and audio voiceover.

I searched for examples of this everywhere, but couldn't find exactly what I had in mind. This link shows an example of video footage, and voiceover, but instead of having actual video of myself speaking, I would include still images of data. Again, this is an example  of a similar idea, but not exactly what I am shooting for. There are a few instances of still images edited into the video, but this would be more common, and once again, I wouldn't actually be present on screen, or do any filming with a camera, but instead clip together a majority of images with recorded audio voiceover.

1. Although different in concept from the first genre discussed, this genre has similar goals and strengths. It is designed to balance visuals and explanations to create a powerful and clear argument.

2. The setting of this genre could be more widely available, through social media or other websites it could be published on. This setting is more wide and free than the first genre, giving this genre a slight advantage over the previous one.

3. Again, the genre would focus on logos and ethos. Using provoking visuals and firm data, the genre emphasizes logical facts and emotional imagery.

4. The whole basis of the genre uses photos, and possibly videos, to support the audio explanations and argument.

5. As I will be talking to my audience through audio clips, the style will most likely be conversational, although in some situations I will attempt to be as academic as possible.

Positive Reactions:
1. People understand the data behind the controversy more clearly because of good explanations and visuals.
2. People understand the logical approach to making an accusation of cheating.
3. People understand the overreaction Sky had to the data as being overly emotional.

Negative Rebuttals:
1. Some may argue that at the end of the day the data was rightfully Sky's.
Response: Yes, but if Froome is so adamant about being clean, he should be acting in as little suspicion as possible, so trying to hide something is wrong.

2. Some may argue that the amount of times Froome has been under question means he is cheating.
Response: People need to understand the gravity of a doping accusation, especially in the realm of cycling, and how hard it is to completely cheat the system in place to test for doping. As there is no definitive evidence of cheating, and merely speculation and slightly suspect actions/performances, this is still not enough for people to condemn Froome.

3. Finally, some may argue that suspect data does prove something about Froome.
Response: Yes, suspect data does prove something about Froome, but all it can prove at this point is that he is a masterful athlete, because it doesn't show anything that is 100% humanly impossible.

Analyzing Purpose

This blog post contains an discussion of my own goals for my argument in project 3.

Ede, Sharon. "Calvin-Susie." 10/30/15 via Cruxcatalysit

The main goals of my public argument is to convince two sides of a controversy to agree with one another on certain points that I believe to be right. My belief is that Froome should not be under such close scrutiny and shouldn't be accused of cheating until this actually can be proven. As far as evidence or proof, there is nothing substantial or definitive that justifies the accusations that are being thrown at Froome. On the other hand, Froome and Sky clearly had the wrong reaction to leaked data. I support their opposition on this situation, as if they truly had nothing to hide Froome should've allowed the data to be public. When arguing this I want readers to see the logic and reasonable position that I am taking, so that they can primarily agree with my argument, or at least be able to see the reason behind the argument of opposition.

Plausible actions/reactions:
Because I am going down the middle, and taking the side of (lets call them group a and group b, a being in support of all that Froome did, and b being in opposition of all that Froome did) each group in one of the two situations, my audience will most likely react in agreement to a portion of my argument.
I believe that even if some aren't convinced of my argument, they will still be able to see the reason behind the side that I am arguing, and will better understand the other side of the argument than what they agree with.

Not plausible:
Of course it is not plausible that everyone agrees with everything I have to say.
I don't expect everyone to finish my entire argument, and this will most likely depend on how I structure it.

Likely Consequences:
I don't expect to be reaching a huge audience, so I don't expect the consequences of my argument to be that widespread.
The first consequence I can foresee is that some audience members change their minds about what they believe about the controversy.
A second consequence I can foresee is that some of my audience learns about the Froome controversy for the first time, and as I am their first source, they will most likely agree with my argument.
If I was reaching a wider audience, and include the proper data to support my argument, I could see accusations against Froome being somewhat stifled as a consequence of my argument.

Possible Audiences:
Among the audiences are the two groups that I mentioned above, group a and group b. Both of these groups are equally likely to move towards my goal in some way, as I expect them both to agree with at least some of my argument. Also among my audience is those who have no previous conceptions or ideas about the Froome controversy, and have not yet taken a side. These audience members are most likely to advance my cause, because I expect them to agree with most of what I have to say.

Analyzing Context

This blog post discusses and analyzes the context of the Froome controversy that project 3 is on, according to questions from Writing Public Lives.

"Context Matters." 10/29/15 via Contextfm.com

1. There are two schools of thought in my debate, the first believes that Froome was doping according to certain data, and the other believes that Froome is clean, and furthermore that the data was private and illegally procured.

2. As I mentioned above, the primary points of contention are the question of Froome's honesty, and whether or not he is doping, as well as the issue of the data that was released regarding his Tour de France performance, whether or not it was legally distributed, and the harsh reaction to it being made public.

3. The points of agreement between parties is the sanctity of cycling, and the continual progress in the sport in sportsmanship and competition.

4. The ideological differences between the parties hinge on the question of whether or not Froome is actually doping, which it is hard to definitively say.

5. As far as the text that I am most familiar with, there is very little call to action for the audience in this controversy. The purpose of the information is mostly to inform the audience, and to raise awareness, as there is little the majority of average interested fans can do.

6. For the issue of doping, Froome and supporters' perspectives will be helpful for my argument, and for the issue of data, the perspective of those vying for freedom of information will be useful. I chose these perspectives because they support the situations that I believe should've played out at the Tour de France.

7. The perspectives that will be a threat are the opposite of those that support. These are the perspectives of those who are convinced completely that Froome was doping, and Sky and Froome's perspective on the data that was released. This may seem backwards, but it will make sense as I get more in depth with my argument.


After reading Grace and Zayla's blog posts, I realized how much people have been improving throughout this class, and how well most of the class is executing their assignments. Both the posts I read seemed similar to mine, reassuring me that I executed the assignment correctly. Another point I realized, is how important understanding the viewpoints opposing my argument will be. Refuting these views with information will strengthen my argument immensely, so I should keep the importance of this idea in mind as I proceed. 

Audience and Genre

This blog post discusses the target audience of my 3'rd project, the places I could publish my research, and links to examples of these ideas.

Lund, John. "Pets at the Movies." 10/13/15 via John Lund Photography

Audience 1:

Obviously the primary audience involved will be sports fans, and specifically those who follow cycling closely. They will be interested for more input on the Froome controversy, simply because it died down, and was never resolved. Also, going forwards into future cycling competitions it is an important reminder of what major scandal happened previously.

For this audience I could publish my research in more sports specific venues, such as a sports dedicated website or a sports journal. 

Examples:

Sports website:

ESPN
Cycling News

Sports Journal (Just examples of Journals, these are also websites but I could publish research in an actual journal form."

Sports Illustrated
The Ride Journal (This link opens to the Ride Journal homepage, where you can download the past versions of the actual Journal, as an example.)

Audience 2:

Another audience I may reach is less sports specific, and more controversy specific. This audience is the type of people who are very interested in news, related to all venues, such as people who read newspapers consistently, watch the new on TV, or are active in social media.

For this audience I can publish my research and opinions through more wider venues, such as more general news sources or social media.

News:

New York Times
CNN

Social Media

Facebook
Twitter

Extended Annotated Bibliography

This blog post includes a link to my extended annotated bibliography. 

"German Shepherd Puppy." 10/23/15 via InspirationSeek.com

Narrowing my Focus

This post includes a few edited questions from the previous post, and an explanation of why I think these are key to the focus of my project.

Jump, Paul. "Narrowing Road Sign." 10/23/15 via Times Higher Education

1. When did this controversy end/fizzle out? Is it still an issue today? Is Froome still under question today?

2. Was there any backlash about the freedom of social media and data?
3. What was proved about this controversy, and can anything be said about Froome's doping for sure?

I think these two questions address the main points of the issue. First, the initial question involves information about the current state of the controversy, and the importance of Froome's alleged doping, as well as the eventual outcome of the investigation, regarding whether or not Froome was evidently cheating. Second it deals with the information regarding the data, as well as the issue of it being removed.

Questions About Controversy

This blog post includes a compilation of questions about doping in cycling, specifically related to Chris Froome, and what information I need to know before diving into the public debate.

Butt, Kyle. "Upcoming Debate." 10/23/15 via Apologetic Press

Who?
1. How many times has Froome been under question about doping?
2. What kind of authority does Vayer have in the cycling world?
3. Who else on Sky was involved in this controversy?

What?
1. Is Froome still being questioned?
2. Is the data still unavailable?
3. Was there any backlash about the freedom of social media and data?

When?
1. When did this controversy end/fizzle out? Is it still an issue today?
2. What were issues in the timeframe leading up to the Tour de France involving Froome/Sky/Vayer?
3. Were there any other issues after the Tour de France?

Where?
1. Outside of the cycling community how much media was involved with the issue?
2. Did all of this happen at the Tour de France, or was it mostly in the aftermath?
3. Where were the resources that Sky used with Twitter to remove data?

How?
1. How has the media portrayed this in general? For Froome, against Froome, or indifferently?
2. How come scholarly media seems relatively uninvolved in this controversy?
3. How should media proceed with handling this issue going forwards, in future cycling events?

Reflection on Project 2

This blog post includes a personal reflection on my revision process after completing my second project.

de Ruiter, Bob. "Failection." 10/23/15 via Envatotuts+

1. The biggest portion of revision I did from draft to draft had to do with content. I expanded more and more as I continued drafting. I would rather write slowly, and go over my work multiple times before adding to it. This way I revise small portions as I go, and simply add content the further I am along in my drafting process.

2. My thesis evolved the better I knew the article. After reading it more and more and analyzing it more closely, I realized what was highlighted and valued by the article as extremely important. This effected my thesis, as I changed it to reflect my new perspective on the article.

3, 4, 5. As I mention above, the changes came from a personal better understanding of the articles thesis, and the methods with which this thesis was argued. The thesis changes this prompted did not effect my credibility, but gave a more accurate analysis to the audience. It did not alter the intended audience of my analysis however.

6. Most of the changes that I did to my project involving sentence structure dealt with punctuation, specifically commas.

7. Learning how to effectively and correctly use commas caused my sentence structure to be more clear, and thus the purpose and meaning of each sentence to be understandable. This lead to better understanding of what I was communicating for my audience.

8. Yes, at times I did have to reconsider the conventions of the genre, and most of this was related to my audience. We went over this in class a few times which helped me understand better.

9. Taking time to reflect on my project doesn't help me reconsider my identity as a writer. Instead, it actually makes me realize what my writing identity is. Typically I don't go through writing a project with a specific identity in mind. Looking back and reflecting on my project process helps me learn about how I write, and what is successful for me and what is not, helping me realize my writing identity.


After reading Jon and Grace's posts I learned a few things. One, people seemed to have a reasonable grasp on the personal writing identity and revision processes. Second, a lot of the struggles that my peers had were related to conventions of the genre. The analytical heavy style lead to verbose and complicated sentences, which in turn lead to tricky punctuation and punctuation errors. Also, the idea of balancing the audience as new students, while trying to rhetorically analyze was easily the hardest part of this project, and I'm still 99% sure I didn't execute this correctly.

Project 2

This blog post includes a link to Project 2

Punctuation, Part 2

For this post, I will once again look over Rules for Writers, and address more aspects of punctuation that I struggle with.

Hannah. "Punctuation." 10/22/15 via Story

I read every section of the book on punctuation, and found nothing that I needed to work on outside of commas. This may sound vain or cocky, but I truly believe that outside of my comma usage my punctuation is pretty solid.

1. A common mistake I find myself making is adding commas after a coordinating conjunction, which, according to the section, "avoiding other common misuses of the comma" is a mistake.

2. Another mistake I find myself making is found in the section, "do not use commas to set off restrictive or mildly parenthetical elements," which I find myself doing frequently.

3. Another mistake I make is adding a comma after a phrase beginning an inverted sentence. This is because I confuse the ordinary sentence and inverted sentence, and I feel there should be a comma in both situations, while in reality only one requires a comma.

After editing....
I learned nothing new about my writing style. My struggle with commas is something I have been aware of. For this reason, noticing the comma errors in my paper after reading about commas rules was not surprising or new. I learned lessons regarding punctuation, but not anything new about myself as a writer.

Example 1: "For this reason it is important to know the author of Scandal Upends Toshiba’s Lauded Reputation, before directly analyzing the article and its strengths, and, it is also important to briefly discuss where the article is published."

In this example the comma after the and that is underlined is unnecessary, and violates the rule that there should not be commas after coordinating conjunctions. 

Example 2: One article that was written about this issue is titled, Scandal Upends Toshiba’s Lauded Reputation.

In this example the comma included before the title of the article is unnecessary, and violates the rule that says commas should not be used to set off mildly parenthetical elements.

Paragraph Analysis 2

This blog post includes a link to a document which includes the body paragraphs of my project 2 draft, and my personal analysis of these paragraphs and what I learned after dissecting my own writing.

"Hamburger." 10/17/15 via Las Positas College

Link to paragraph analysis. (Update, still having issues with this, working on re-doing it in a different doc entirely, understand there will be a late penalty.)
First, I've had some issues with this Google document. I've been trying to update it as I update my draft, and then continue to analyze my paragraphs. However, the link has failed to work and I had to create a new document, replacing the previous one.
Second, I am structuring my ideas as smaller paragraphs so they are easier to read, and then am breaking them up into larger sections. For this reason analyzing each paragraph was different, as some of them contained some separate aspects of what I was required in each paragraph. Overall this exercise was very helpful, but a serious struggle.

The main thing I learned from my paragraph analysis is that I need more supporting information for my first portion of my paper. This might just have to do with the topic of these paragraphs however, as a majority of my initial work sets up the context of the article's content and discusses the author and publisher of the article. It is hard to provide support for this as I am, for the most part, communicating factual information. What I also discovered is that I find a good structure and systematic approach, I can ensure that all my body paragraphs are functioning correctly. Looking through each and seeing what is ideal, and what is weak, gives me a good idea of how to proceed with writing for the rest of my paper, and how to fix my weak work.

Revised Conclusion

In this blog post I include my original project 2 conclusion, and my revised and new project 2 conclusion, and why I think the new version is better.

"Conclusion." 10/17/15 via The Business Plan Shop

My original conclusion was weak. It merely mentioned the article and author, and then restated my thesis, word for word. My new conclusion includes similar elements, but extends the discussion of Toshiba to business in general, and addresses the "so what" of honor in business in general. Although I am still not completely satisfied with my conclusion, I think I am on the right track.

Original conclusion:
To conclude, Soble's article is very complex, and does a good job of summarizing the Toshiba controversy. However, Soble goes deeper than just the surface of the controversy. Through in depth discussion regarding the Toshiba scandal, content such as video interviews that provide further understanding, various outside sources, and a credible tone, Soble drives home the argument that Toshiba's valued and storied reputation was tarnished through their business scandal.

New conclusion:
Soble's article does a good job of discussing the Toshiba scandal, and really gets under the surface of the basic controversy. Using video interviews, a credible tone, and emphasis on cultural values the article communicates a clear message, honor and reputation is important in business. This issue extends much further than just Toshiba. The importance of honesty and trust in big business is understated. People of all classes and places invest their money and lives into business, and for these companies to scam them can have widespread and devastating effects on honest and hardworking people.

Revised Introduction

This blog post contains my introduction from my draft in its original form, and a new version that is written better, as well as an explanation of why new is better.

Tice, Carol. "Handshake Business Blobs." 10/17/15 via Make a Living Writing

My re-done intro has much more content first of all, and is more interesting initially. I used narrative to capture the interest of the audience as soon as possible. My transitions in my middle portion set up the context of the controversy and article better, and transition into my thesis more smoothly. My new intro might be a little long, but I think it is good for the paper.

Original intro:

Toshiba was involved in a huge scandal because they were inflating their profits illegally. One article that was written about this issue is titled Scandal Upends Toshiba’s Lauded Reputation. It was published in The New York Times in July of 2015, and was written by Jonathan Soble. Through in depth discussion regarding the Toshiba scandal, content such as video interviews that provide further understanding, various outside sources, and a credible tone, Soble drives home the argument that Toshiba's valued and storied reputation was tarnished through their business scandal.

New intro:

Maybe something big is happening, so you tune in to watch the news. Maybe it's Sunday and you’re having some beers and watching  football. Maybe you’re writing a paper for a class. Whatever the case, whatever screen you might be using, there is a good chance you’re using a Toshiba device. Toshiba is one of the leading technology companies in the area of TVs, and they dabble with computers, but, for a majority of their consumers, no one really knows what goes on behind the curtain. Much like the Wizard of Oz, when people finally realize what is going on behind the scenes, it is far from the spectacular expectations. 

Recently, Toshiba was involved in a huge scandal because they were inflating their profits illegally. This controversy had widespread effects in the business world, and is a huge issue currently in the field of business and economy. In the aftermath of this controversy the CEO of Toshiba resigned, which was a national issue, and attracted a lot of press. One article that was written about this issue is titled Scandal Upends Toshiba’s Lauded Reputation. It was published in The New York Times in July of 2015, and was written by Jonathan Soble. To discuss this issue and article, I will be rhetorically analyzing it. Soble uses a variety of resources and approaches to emphasize cultural values and ethics in his article.

Through in depth discussion regarding the Toshiba scandal, content such as video interviews that provide further understanding, various outside sources, and a credible tone, Soble drives home the argument that Toshiba's valued and storied reputation was tarnished through their business scandal.

Reflection on Project 2 Draft

For this blog post I will discuss my peer review and what I learned from it based on information from Student's Guide.

"Peer Review." 10/16/15 via Considine Considine Certified Public Accountants

For my peer reviews I looked at Chris and Grace's drafts.

While going through the Student's Guide I am realizing that I am very far behind on my drafting process. I have been struggling with the writing of my project, but reading good examples and reading self reflection and answering questions from the Student's Guide has helped a lot. I will be putting a lot of work into my draft over the next few days and the weekend. However, some of the following questions were hard to answer due to the fact that my draft hasn't reached the point that they discuss. For now I will just be as honest as possible and hope that points aren't deducted for my short and incompetent answers.


The following information is all related to questions posed by Student's Guide


1. My thesis is very identifiable. It directly discusses the rhetorical strategies that my paper will address, and does not use vague terms. I think I may need to add more to it if I add more to my analysis, which I can see myself doing eventually.

2. I am still in the process of writing my essay. However, my planned organization has an introduction, explanation of context of the article, then rhetorical analysis, as shown in my earlier outline. It will follow the order of my thesis, and finish with a conclusion.

3. I need to spend some time researching this because off the top of my head I don't even know that the five elements are.

4. I do discuss the effectiveness of certain rhetorical strategies in my draft, and will continue to stress this idea throughout.

5. Yes, the little content that I have so far effectively uses the text as support.

6. I have been struggling with my thesis, but now that I have seen some good examples I think I can write it. I will ensure that my thesis leaves the reader wanting more and answers the so what question by making sure it goes beyond my article and discusses the more interesting and important bigger issue. It is still not written currently however.

Punctuation Part 1

This blog post includes an analysis of my punctuation in my draft, based on tips from Rules for Writers. 

Smiga, George. "Punctuation Marks." 10/13/15 via Building on the Word.

Immediately when I saw that we were reading about punctuation and learning about punctuation I knew what I would be working on. I've spent a great deal of time learning about and practicing punctuation, so for the most part my mechanics are solid. However, I have always struggled with comma usage, and continue to struggle with comma usage, so I knew I would be reading chapters about this.

1. The first portion I read was on commas. The biggest thing that was new to me was the discussion on conjunctions, and how to use commas joining independent clauses. My biggest issue with commas is not thinking about the sentence structure, and where I am supposed to place commas based on rules. Instead I place them where they sound right, as if I am writing a speech with pauses.

2. The second portion I read was on unnecessary commas. The most helpful information for me is that I should not use a comma between a verb and a subject or object. I make this mistake a lot, and looking out for this situation will help me punctuate more correctly.

3. The third portion I read was on semi colons. Again, the most important and helpful portion of this section had to do with commas, and when to replace them with semi-colons. I learned that this situation has to do with independent clauses and transitional expressions, and looking for this will also help my paper flow more smoothly.



After reading Chris and Grace's project drafts I found that the issues I struggle with related to commas are not problems for most people. Overuse of commas has always been very particular to my own writing and style, and it is something I really need to work with.

1. Here is a clear example of how to use a comma in between two independent clauses. This is something I need to be looking for. The example comes from Grace's draft.

"When one is anti-vaccination, they believe that vaccinations go against natural immune defenses and can cause autism and disease."

2. An example of a subject or object that I would've put a comma between can be found in Chris' post, where he appropriately leaves out the comma.

"This, in turn, gives the author more credibility, as he shows he is passionate and inspired, and he passes that feeling off to others."

In between the, "shows" and, "he" I would've put a comma, and I need to watch for these situations in my project.

3. As I said on both Chris and Grace's drafts, there were no semi-colons in either. Semi-colons are more rare in writing. However, I did look through and found that there were no instances in either draft where a commas was used between an independent clause and transitional expression that should've been a semi-colon instead. I chose this section of the book simply because it dealt with unnecessary commas, but don't feel that this particular situation will be an issue in my own draft.

Draft of Rhetorical Analysis

This blog post contains a link to my first draft of my Rhetorical Analysis.

"Draft Transcription." 10/13/15 via 1888typeitup.com

This is very much a work in progress. I am only about halfway done in terms of content, but I think (?) the first portion of my draft is fairly polished. As you read through keep in mind 2 things. 1, I plan on adding a lot of actual rhetorical analysis and a conclusion, for now I am just setting this up. 2, my introduction is very very long right now, but I like my interest catcher (the first paragraph). I'm interested on peer feedback for this interest catcher and the rest of my intro (first 3 paragraphs, last one is my thesis).

Practicing Summary and Paraphrase

In this blog post I will take a section from my article and paraphrase it then summarize it.

Watson, Bill. "Calvin and Hobbes." 10/12/15 via Pintrest.

Original Source:
“Toshiba has a 140-year history and was like a straight-A student when it came to corporate governance,” said Shin Ushijima, a lawyer who serves as president of the Corporate Governance Network, a watchdog group. “Toshiba shares are in everyone’s pension plans. Executives’ responsibility is extremely heavy.”

My paraphrase of original source:
Shin Ushijima, who works in legal matters as president of a group in charge of monitoring illegal activity within corporate functions, discusses how Toshiba had a lengthy history of being clean and honest in the way their finances were run. He stresses how impactful Toshiba was on the finances of many individuals, and the pressure this put on management.

My summary of the original source:
Shin Ushijima, an authority on finance management, remembers Toshiba's clean record, and discusses the obligation management has to the many lives Toshiba impacts.

Project 2 Outline

This blog post includes and outline of my plans for my project, as well as a paragraph which explains how this outline was effected by reading from Writing Public Lives.

"Pen Outline." 10/11/15 via npics.

The biggest thing that initially helped me from the reading was finding the distinction between what should be included or thought of as my introduction, and what should really stand out as my thesis. The thesis-is that I worked on in my last blog post included contextual information, that is really more fitting as part of the introduction. The thesis is supposed to be more related to arguments and claims that my paper is centered around. For this reason the thesis also ties in very closely with my analytical claims. Another portion of the text that helped shape my outline was the section on textual evidence. This influenced my ideas for body paragraphs and support of my analytical claims because it made me realize including the text as support and just using the text in my body in general are key to a successful paper.


Introduction:
The first sentence of the introduction should catch the interest of the audience.
The remainder of my into should give details and context regarding the article, such as title, date, author, and primary issues.
Then I should include the thesis of my article, and then transition into my thesis.

Thesis:
Some of the content I included in my thesis workshop, I decided would be more fitting for an introduction. Although my thesis will most likely be worked into my introduction, as the contextual information is included previously, the thesis portion will center around rhetorical analysis and strategies used by the author.

Body Paragraphs:
The first paragraph or grouping of paragraphs of mine should include more context and details regarding the Toshiba controversy.

My second paragraph or grouping of paragraphs should begin to look at the article. First, I should give context regarding the article, some research on the author, and the place of publication.

Third, I need to discuss the thesis of the article, and how this relates to the Toshiba controversy, and the context of the article.

Finally, I will discuss the various methods that are used by the author to communicate this thesis to the audience effectively. This portion of the body will hopefully include a good deal of content.


Analytical claims:
The biggest claims of my analysis are that Toshiba's reputation was ruined, and that the author of the article stresses the value of honor and reputation. I also will argue that there are values in the article that are important in Japanese culture, the culture of the scandal, and American culture, the culture of the author and publisher. Finally, I will claim that the author leans heavily on an appeal to ethos to communicate and argument and strengthen his credibility.

Support:
The first claim I can support with details of the controversy, and selections from the article, including title and thesis. The second claim I can also support with content from the article, but also with content from research and outside sources, which given the size of the claim and topic, I am sure will be easy to find. Finally, I will use portions of the Students Guide and content from the article to support my last claim.

Conclusion:
Finally, my conclusion will reiterate much of the information contained in my thesis. All the analytical claims I make will be included in my thesis, and will then be restated at the conclusion. After supporting evidence and logical arguments, my claims will be backed up, and restating them will remind the reader of what I was arguing. Finally, I will try and end on a profound or questioning note, not exactly sure what yet, that will let the reader know I am concluding my analysis.



After reading Michaela and Joki's blog posts I'm a little unsure if I did this assignment right or not. For me this was a process and thinking exercise for me to sit down and write about where I envisioned my article going. It was more conceptual, and I saw this in Joki's post. I know what I want to do as far as organization and how to most effectively communicate my argument consistently. However, Michaela had more specific content that she was including in her draft and eventual project, and so I was unsure if I was supposed to include very specific ideas for content in this outline. Either way, I think this outline will help me immensely with drafting.

Draft Thesis Statements

In this blog post, I am going to work through some ideas and drafts of a thesis for my rhetorical analysis.

"Thesis." 10/08/15 via relookatmoi.com

Thesis 1: In the article Scandal Upends Toshiba's Lauded Reputation the author, Jonathan Soble, drives home the point that Toshiba's reputation was ruined in their recent scandal. He does this by stressing the value of honor, and discussing in depth how exactly Toshiba was dishonest. Soble includes an interview of the CEO of Toshiba from after the scandal, which adds greatly to his credibility. Combining this with an emphasis on ethics, related to cultural values of multiple cultures, Soble's argument is relatable and detailed.

Thesis 2: Jonathan Soble uses a variety of resources and approaches to emphasize cultural values and ethics in his article, Scandal Upends Toshiba's Lauded Reputation. Through in depth discussion and explanation of the Toshiba scandal, content such as video interviews that provide further understanding, and a credible tone, Soble drives home the argument that Toshiba's valued and storied reputation was tarnished through their business scandal.

Thesis 3: The article Scandal Upends Toshiba's Lauded Reputation emphasizes how the recent inflation of profits by Toshiba ruined their valued and honorable reputation. The author, Jonathan Soble, does this through detailed recounting and explanation of the scandal, including a video interview, and an emphasis on appeal to ethics.


I feel that the last thesis is by far the weakest of the three. There are aspects of all that I like, though I feel that they are all a bit wordy. I need to figure out how to communicate the basic ideas included in each in a more concise way. I feel that I can add to my thesis if I don't have enough content, but for now I think the ideas discussed in the above thesis-is include enough content for me to start working on my project. Making sure I stress each point of my thesis thoroughly, without being redundant, is key to the success of my project.


After reading Carrie and Allison's posts, I found that they shared similar struggles to me. Managing to communicate everything that needs to be communicated in our thesis-is, without being too wordy or confusing is going to be a major challenge. Word choice and organization is key. Also, finding what is strong in one thesis, and strong in another thesis, and combining them will be the most effective way of crafting the strongest thesis possible.

Analyzing my Audience

For this blog post I will discuss the audience of my article, based on questions posed by the text The Student's Guide to First-Year Writing.

Chisholm, Sarah. "Audience." 10/05/15 via MediaMiser

1. I am writing for students who are just entering the field I am in, which in my case is business. I should assume that they are interested in business and that they have little knowledge about my topic, or how to rhetorically analyze sources and situations. It is hard to say what exactly their beliefs are, as it can vary greatly from student to student.

2. In the case of the Toshiba situation, I can assume that my audience will take the side against Toshiba, and they will agree that the inflated profits were immoral and wrong. As this is my position, as well as the position of the article, I don't need to cater anything specifically towards the beliefs of the audience, as the view I will take should be fairly widely accepted.

3. For the most part the audience will want to know, what exactly tarnished the reputation of Toshiba. Expanding on this, they will want the details of the scandal in how Toshiba was dishonest, what the repercussions of it were, and how the CEO handled the public outcry and his own resignation. 

4. As I mentioned before, the article's perspective, my perspective, and the audience's perspective, are all aligned for the most part. For this reason I expect my audience to agree with the argument that I make.

5. I am trying to relate to my audience in a intelligent and persuasive manner. This will be done by making my article professional and approachable, because the more the audience relates, the more my argument resonates with them. 

6. The primary idea with which I will connect with my audience is stressing the values that are prevalent in the article, the Japanese cultures of Toshiba, and the American culture of The New York Times. These shared values will help me connect with my audience, and help them relate to my words and arguments. Having shared ideas and beliefs will make my words that much more persuasive and appealing.




After reading Zayla and Bailey's posts I realized two things. First, I think I did a pretty good job with this post. The two that I read were similar in length and content, and answered the questions very directly and concisely. This reassured me that I am doing the assignments right. Second, I found that from now on in posts like this I should probably include the questions posed by the text as part of my post. Although most of my readers know the questions I am answering, as they are answering them as well, having them present in the post for context is always helpful.

Cluster of "Scandal Upends Toshiba's Lauded Reputation"

This blog post contains a cluster of my article, and a brief discussion of my thought process while crafting it.

Oh, Mathias. "Screenshot of Cluster." 10/05/15 via Coggle.

For my cluster I mostly covered the key ideas of the argument of the text. Most of the different sections of the article I included, then highlighted some of the key values and ideas in the article. Finally, I included some of the devices the author used to communicate this information.

Analyzing Rhetorical Strategies in "Scandal Upends Toshiba's Lauded Reputation"

This blog post goes through step by step and analyzes what devices my article uses to appeal to the audience, based on information from The Students Guide to First-Year Writing.

Rozendall, Rafael. "Stairs." 10/03/15 via NewRafael.com. 

The items under Appeals to Credibility that I thought my article employed were, references to credible sources, tone, visual arrangement, and appeals to values or beliefs shared by the audience.

First, the article has a video of the CEO of Toshiba discussing the scandal, which is clearly a reliable source, and adds an immense amount of credibility to the article. The author uses this because they want to give information from a source first hand, so that the audience can recognize their words and the article is correct. Second, tone and visual arrangement were very professional, fitting the theme and proper genre of the article. The professional language and standard layout helped the article appear more credible. Finally, the article appeals to values shared by the audience, as it emphasizes the importance of honor and reputation. Through this, the audience can relate to the article.

Overall, these techniques make the article relatable and informational, while appearing professional and organized. The message is much more effective because of the varied forms that the article uses to communicate, while maintaining its relatable but credible tone. The author does not have any biases.

The devices that the article uses under Appeals to Emotion are a level of formality, and sound effects.

The article is fairly formal in its discussion of the Toshiba scandal. It addresses the issue directly, and goes in depth on the intricacies of the resignation of the CEO and what caused this. Again, there is a video in the article which utilizes audio/sound effects as another way to communicate information.

The video is extremely helpful in conveying credibility, as you can hear about the issue from the man himself, the CEO of Toshiba, proving immediately that the article is truthful. Again, this direct information shows that the author does not have any biases. The emotional reaction the author is trying to create is fairly nonexistent, as the appeal to emotion devices are not that prevalent throughout the article. Because of this these devices do little to add to or detract from the article.

Finally, under appeals to logic, the article uses interviews or expert opinions, and effective organization.

Once again, the video included in the article is utilized to appeal to Logic, as well as the other two branches discussed earlier. Because it is an interview of the leading expert on the resignation of the CEO of Toshiba, the CEO himself, it is an incredibly powerful source to add to credibility. Also, the article is very well organized. It opens with the video to show that the following information is true, then discusses the thesis, related to the reputation of Toshiba, then explains the details of the controversy. The author wants a response of understanding, which is exactly what the article causes. As the primary purpose of the article is to be informative, in order to communicate the validity of the thesis, this informational focus and organization is very effective and credible.



After reading Bailey and Austin's articles, I realized that mine is again fairly unique. Many of the articles emphasize all three aspects of persuasion, where as my article focuses mostly on an appeal to ethics. It does have aspect of logic and emotion, but the controversy in general deals more with ethics than anything else. Also, I found that some of these devices end up having no effect on the credibility of the author, and instead are just tools of argument and persuasiveness.

Analyzing Messages in "Scandal Upends Toshiba's Lauded Reputation."

This blog post discusses some of the ideas about message and purpose in The Students Guide to First-Year Writing, and which of these ideas are important to my article, and which are not as useful.

"Message, Outline Icon." 10/03/15 via Iconfinder. Public Domain Dedication License.

The three most important bullets from the section on message and purpose are pretty clear.

The first is "respond to a particular occasion or text." The entire basis of the article is in response to an occasion, which is the resignation of the CEO of Toshiba. This resignation is a result of the revelation that the company was committing fraud, another event that the article focuses on.

The second important bullet is to, "reflect on a topic." The topic that the article reflects on is the honorable reputation of Toshiba, and how their leadership ruined their reputation by covering up illegal financial activity.

Third, the bullet "analyze, synthesize, or interpret," is important to the article. The article is analyzing what exactly happened with Toshiba. It discusses how their reputation was tarnished, why exactly this happened, the intricacies of the business' fraud, and how the leadership of Toshiba reacted.

I think the two least relevant bullets to the author's goal are, "advocate for change," and, "inform the reader about a topic that is often misunderstood." First, there is no change to advocate for. The controversy happened, caused certain repercussions, and there is nothing any audience can to do alter the effects of Toshiba's fraud. Second, there is no misunderstanding to be cleared up regarding the controversy. It is straightforward and clear that Toshiba was inflating their profits, and, upon being caught, some of the leader figures stepped down.

Their are no nuances or layers that the author is attempting to communicate. The general content of the article is explanatory. Most of it is helping the audience understand exactly how the Toshiba accounts were falsified, and the reaction of Toshiba leadership upon discovery. The rest of it discusses Toshiba's reputation as an honest company, and how this was ruined as a result of the scandal. This is all reporting, and the only real argument being made is that Toshiba's name is now tarnished as a result of the scandal. This does not have layers or nuances to it, and is very clear cut.

Analyzing my Own Assumptions

In this blog post I will compare my personal beliefs to those that are valued in my article of choice, which I discussed in my previous blog post.

Oh, Mathias. "Screenshot of a Thought Bubble." 10/02/15 via Wordpress.

Of the primary values that I discussed from the article, I personally share all of them. Reputation, honesty, and honor are all very important to me. The three ideas are very similar, and have endured because basic human morals value honesty, and ones reputation will always be important. The way someone is perceived and talked about by others will almost always matter to them, and for them to have an honorable reputation is important, thus this value has endured.

There is nothing valued by the article that is not reflected in my own view, as it is intended for an American audience like myself. The primary issue deals with honesty, which is something I value immensely, and every other value that goes hand in hand with this I also value, so there is no belief that I do not share.

The text is written by an American, primarily for Americans, but about a Japanese controversy. Both these cultures value connect to and reflect the importance of honesty that leads to a honorable reputation. These ideas are valued almost universally by cultures. Again, the moral values at the center of the article are widely upheld as right, so there are no values in the article that aren't shared in American culture. America does not place as much importance on honorable reputations, but it is still valuable to them.

The text is written during my time, and is actually very recent, so the valued cultural beliefs have not changed.


After reading Grace and Zayla's articles I learned a few things about my own post and my article. First I discovered that many of the modern controversies involve values that have changed drastically in the last few centuries. My article however deals with key ideas that have been upheld throughout centuries and from culture to culture. I feel that this will be a fairly unique situation. Second, I discovered that people are also dealing with controversial values, that many value and others don't. My controversy exists because the key values were violated, which created an outcry, whereas other students controversies they are analyzing have to do with people fighting over different values.

Analyzing My Text's Cultural Setting

This blog post analyzes the setting of the article that I chose, and breaks down aspects of the article related to the time it was written and where it was written.

Moisey "Optical Microscope." 10/3/15 via Wikipedia. 

The article was written in The New York Times, an american newspaper company, by an american journalist, and so has very American values. However, because it is about a Japanese company, and the controversy they're experiencing, it also reflects some Japanese values. The key value that is crucial to the article is honor. While this is valued in America, it is especially important to Japanese culture.

The idea of honor is directly discussed in the article, and is a key part of its thesis. In Japan, honor and reputation to ones name, ones family, or in the case of Toshiba, ones company, is highly valued, which is reflected in the outcry that Toshiba's dishonesty caused. The text discusses how Toshiba was an upstanding and valued company, considered honorable for decades. Tarnishing this reputation is a huge scandal in Japan, because of their cultural value of honor. The text doesn't directly address the Japanese culture's value on honor, but still discusses the "lauded reputation" of Toshiba.

The article is clearly in support of the Japanese value of honor. Americans place high value on honor, honesty, and reputation as well, so the American author and newspaper company share the value. The article does not directly applaud these values, but instead points out where they were contradicted in the Toshiba scandal. 

Cultural Analysis of "Scandal Upends Toshiba's Lauded Reputation."

For my blog post I will be analyzing the article "Scandal Upends Toshiba's Lauded Reputation," published in The New York Times, which will also be the article my next project is centered around. First I will look at keywords from the article, then will discuss the thesis, and finally will look at how these two components effect the argument.

 Nogi, Credit

Kazuhiro. "Toshiba's Chief Executive..." 10/02/15 via Getty Images. 

The three keywords I chose were governance, inflating, and shares. These three ideas have everything to do with the controversy. Governance deals with the leadership of Toshiba, and those in positions of power. Inflating, in this context, has to do with Toshiba tampering with their accounts, to raise their profits to higher than actual. Finally, shares have to do with those invested in the company.

The thesis of the article is that the scandal and immorality involved with Toshiba has tarnished its reputation. Known as one of the more upright, honest, and straightforward companies for many years, the discovery of inflated profits ruins Toshiba's clean record and honest name.

First, governance is key to the argument of the article, because it makes it clear that the whole system of power in Toshiba was aware of the controversial activity in their company. The governance of Toshiba are those who were making decisions to lie, and then covered up their illegal activity. For a majority of those in power to have knowledge of shady accounts only adds to the tarnishing of Toshiba's reputation.

Inflation supports the argument because it explains exactly what it was that Toshiba was doing that was controversial. Understanding how Toshiba was being deceptive also helps the audience realize why their reputation as an upstanding company was ruined.

Finally, shares have to do with why the issue was so controversial. Many who invested in Toshiba were deceived by falsely inflated profit reports, and so invested in a company they thought was doing well, making what they believed to be a smart investment. In actuality Toshiba was struggling, and people were losing money on their investments, creating harsh public backlash when the public realized the fraud that was occurring. This shows how widespread the black stain on Toshiba's reputation spread after they were discovered.

The audience supports the argument because of these key words for three reasons. First, governance helps them realize the depth of the controversy and deception. Second, inflation informs them of what exactly was occurring that was so dishonest. Finally, shares show them why it is such a big issue, and why so many people were in an outcry about Toshiba. By understanding the controversy more thoroughly, the audience will also understand why it was such a harm to Toshiba's reputation.