The piece I choose to do an analysis of for the Denver Rhetor blog was from the opinion section of Denver Post. The piece was “ Leave immigrant law in desert” by the editorialist at the Denver Post. This piece was written because there is anger over the lack of immigration enforcement. Congress has repeatedly failed to pass common-sense immigration reform. As well as Washington In general hasn’t worked hard enough to seal the border. The people of our society who are frustrated with the current immigration situation are hoping Washington will find a solution that will work.
In hopes of creating a solution to our immigration issue, a bill is possibly going to be introduced this month. The bill introduced by senators Angela Giron and Michael Johnston will propose that students who are in the country illegally, but have graduated from Colorado high schools be able to pay in-state tuition when they go to college. The authors of the editorial offer insight on the issue of immigration and their opinion on what the solution should be. Furthermore, the authors question how the bill going to benefit our state and how will affect our society.
This leads them to the conclusion that treating the children of illegal immigrants as state residents is the right thing to do both morally and economically. The piece justifies this conclusion because rewarding lawbreakers is not in our best interest, but children should not suffer for the actions of their parents. Secondly, the piece justifies this conclusion because they believe that it makes sense to create incentives to finish school. Next, the piece justifies this conclusion by arguing that we have already invested in their education up until now because the U.S Supreme Court requires it, so why not continue it. Lastly, the piece justifies this conclusion by arguing that in-state tuition would mount to a relatively small expense and would pay off, in the long run by producing a productive member of society. The piece justifies this conclusion because rewarding lawbreakers is not in our best interest, but children should not suffer for the actions of their parents. Secondly, the piece justifies this conclusion because they believe that it makes sense to create incentives to finish school. Next, the piece justifies this conclusion by arguing that we have already invested in their education up until now because the U.S Supreme Court requires it, so why not continue it. Lastly, the piece justifies this conclusion by arguing that in-state tuition would mount to a relatively small expense and would pay off, in the long run by producing a productive member of society.
The editorialist of this opinion piece convince their audience that their conclusion is right through the important analytical details. The article not only uses important facts, but also hits at the hearts of the American population by appealing to their pathos. It also ties the facts into the audience’s emotions by appealing to their kairos.
This article uses pathos to its advantage by bringing up the feeling of sympathy within the audience for the child. By stirring this feeling within the audience, it encourages the audience to take action against the issue. The audience takes action because they feel guilty for not doing anything to help the poor, helpless child. They want to help the child because they are led to believe through the article that the parents are incapable of taking care of them and therefore it is the right thing to do, both morally and economically. This causes the audience to feel anger towards the parents of the children, and to blame the parents for all the issues the kids are facing in the current situation. This leads the author to use an appeal to kairos to connect with the audience on a deeper level. The author takes the background information on the issue of illegal immigration and uses kairos to show that it is the opportune moment to help the situation. He does this by bringing light to the issue of illegal immigration and the unfair treatment they receive. He shows his audience that this issue is prevalent and important in today’s society. His ultimate goal is to try and convince the skeptics of his article that his arguments are solid because they can be backed up by facts. In order to create an article that connects to all types of people, he had to appeal to pathos, but could not have a solid argument without using kairos. Therefore, without both appeals he could not create an article worth reading.
In the end the author’s goal was to bring attention to a serious issue surrounding illegal immigration. He did this by giving us his opinion and showing us the facts about the issue. He then connected to his audience on a personal level by appealing to the audience’s pathos and karios. He wanted to try and persuade the skeptics or the indifferent people in his audience that the issue was something to pay attention too. Personally, I was skeptical at first about the issue and the opinions that surrounded it. After reading the article though, it changed my mind completely, as I hope it did the other readers.
No comments:
Post a Comment