1    I sort of agree.  These shows tend more towards the goofy and entertainment side of the spectrum rather than towards the informing side of things..

2  Not necessarily, reading a news article just informs me about the news, it does not really teach me how to read rhetorically any more than reading a book does.  When I read a news article, I pay attention to what it is saying not how it is structured.

For my “doubting paper”, I do not yet know the topic, but I know it is going to be a difficult job to prove something I don’t agree with and think is very wrong.  I will most likely go for a logical appeal in order to prove it because I don’t really have a whole lot of credibility as a writer so I don’t have much of an ethos, and Pathos is only effective in some circumstances.

The rhetorical aim of my paper will be to prove my point and get my audience to agree with me.  If I can’t get them to agree with me entirely then I will at least shoot towards swaying their opinion a little bit or towards giving them a different perspective on the issue.

1. The first summery is unfair because it focuses not on what Turner is saying but what the author thinks of what Turner is saying.  It is full of insulting phrases towards the author himself, rather than accurately depicting what the argument says.
2. In the unfair representation the author primarily points out the flaws in the argument and in the author rather than actually just telling us what the argument says.  However, in the fair summery, the author takes a much more objective approach, simply telling us what the argument says without all of the opinion mixed in.
3. In the first summery the author calls Turner things like “ignorant”, “misinformed”, and “biased”.  He focuses on giving his opinion of the author to analyze the argument.  In the second summery, the author leaves Turner out of the equation, only mentioning her name, and keeps the focus on Turner’s argument.
4. I do think that it is important to fairly represent the other side’s argument, but you also have to be sure to tear their argument apart later in the writing.  I think it should be represented in an accurate and objective manner.  You should not try to make it seem strong or weak when you are summarizing it.  Also another side note, sometimes the other side’s argument is completely ridiculous, and although you don’t have to point this out in the summery, you should not try to hide it for fear of being called unfair in your representation of the other side.

-Intro to article

-Summery of what article is saying

-Thesis:  -Does not take any sort of stance.  -He avoids talking about the evidence, and only talks about the placement.  -His thesis shows he is going to focus on the way Goodman argues and what the evidence does for the audience.

-A paragraph for each point of thesis (Analysis)

-Conclusion