The Think Machine @thethinkmachine-blog - Tumblr Blog

Posts

RIA - Campaign: YouTube add against sugar taxes. I asked 3 stores for permission to film, but they all said no, so i filmed this secretly and quickly.

#danlong #rhetoricallyintheworld

Physician Assisted Suicide RIA final

Introduction:

My cultural problem is Physician Assisted Suicide. This is a cultural problem because it harms the sick. This cultural problem is important to me because I feel like it is a subject that everyone should be educated on, because it could affect your life and or a loved ones. It is important to the public because it impacts everyone and affects people's lives and not just their deaths.

Section One:

I will create a campaign for Californias Against Assisted Suicide. The purpose of my campaign is to educate people on the negative effects people have when they discuss PAS being legal.

I would like to encourage the target audience for this organization that PAS endangers the weak and vulnerable, corrupts the practice of medicine and the doctor-patient relationship, compromises the family and the relationships between family generations and betrays human dignity and equality before law.

I hope to reach the organization that way I can inform them more about the effects PAS has on people and or if they were to be involved, as in if in the future a loved one were to be affected by PAS how it would affect their emotions and their views on PAS.

My audience's assumptions (CAAS) about this would be that they encourage what I am informing them about. I know this because of the research I did on the organization and their view on PAS and how they would react and or feel about PAS and what I am saying about it, as in the cons of PAS and why it should be illegal.

Section two:

The conversation of PAS would be people who are affected by PAS personally and emotionally and their viewpoints on PAS. The literature of my cultural problem id pathos. An example of how it is pathos is this case below:

“Kate Cheney, 85, had terminal cancer and told her doctor she wanted assisted suicide. However, he was concerned that she didn’t meet the required criteria for mental competence because of dementia. SO he declines to write the requested prescription and instead referred her to a psychiatric consultation by her daughter. The psychiatric found that Kate had a loss of short term memory. It also appeared that her daughter had more interest in Cheney’s assisted suicide than the patient did herself... “(Personal Stories (Assisted Suicide)).

The example above about Kate Cheney is considered pathos because it brings out readers emotions and makes them react to this in a certain way.

Section Three:

The forms of media I would use to create my campaign would be Facebook because CAAS has a facebook page and has approximately 4,000 followers. I feel as if my audience would respond to Facebook more than than any other form of media because I feel that everyone has a Facebook and not everyone of all ages has a twitter and or know how to use it. And people follow information about this organization on Facebook.

Section Four:

A Facebook page would get to the target audience by making them bring out their emotional side and have them comment on how they feel about PAS and which side they stand on. It will stand out to them by it being creative, colorful, and informative. I believe that the strategies for circulating my writing are effective by writing down a rough draft/ outline and get my thoughts going first then touch up the final draft later.

Conclusion:

My campaign is important because it informs the opposers of PAS more about why PAS affects people in a negative way as in how it affects loved ones and people’s lives. They should care because it could affect their loved ones or them in the future. I feel as if PAS also decreases the value of life and gives us a cheaper way to affect a sick person's life than take the time and money to help save their life.

RIA campaign-Californias Against Assisted Suicide. http://noassistedsuicideca.org/

Physician Assisted Suicide. http://physician-assisted-suicide.weebly.com/pros-and-cons.html

Note to readers: ignore the random symbols and numbers in a few places it wont let me correct it because I typed this in word.

#Chelsea Radosa

Rhetorical intervention assignment final

Introduction- The topic for my rhetorical intervention assignment are stereotypes. Specifically, I focus on the stereotypes about hoodies. People should care about this topic because why should a piece of clothing create such a negative connotation in today’s society. It is only a piece of clothing. Articles of clothing shouldn’t allow people to make assumptions of other people. That is the reason that I have decided to reach out to the ACLU. Because they deal with social injustices such as this.

Section one- The purpose for my campaign is to bring a bigger awareness of how people judge and wrongly accuse someone based off of what they are wearing only. The ACLU is a global corporation but it should have some type of bases for them to continue to fight against this injustice. For example, two people walk in a store and one is wearing a hoodie and the other is wearing a white T-shirt the person with the hoodie will be given the most attention even though he is walking in at the exact same time as the person with the T-shirt. This has been scientifically proven in “Students Wearing Police Uniforms Exhibit Biased Attention towards Individuals Wearing Hoodies”. The example above shows how an officer is trained to respond upon looking at certain individuals based upon their appearance. The social injustice stated above is a perfect example of how most people view hoodies. The audience that I would like to reach out for is the people who are affected most by this stereotype. Such as the young kids who wear hoods idolizing some of their favorite artist. These can sometimes be the people who are affected most because they are targeted because of what they wear.

Section two- The conversation that I have researched for my problem is mostly about why the hoodie holds such a negative meaning. For example in “Give The Hoodie A Whole New Meaning” it was stated by members of society that the hood can never be changed and it can never mean anything different because of how everyone else interoperates the hoodie as a sign for gangs, thugs and crime. The people in the article before said that the clothing is what makes someone a thug not their actions that’s the problem with society because in the person’s eyes who said that the person who wears a hood is always wrong. No matter the circumstance. This is provoking some type of emotion either anger, confusion or even frustration. (“Tragedy Gives A Hoodie A Whole New Meaning”). This article should be noticed by the ACLU because this is evidence of how certain people feel about wearing a hood. The ACLU should focus in on this article or articles like this so that it can be brought to more people’s attention.

Section three- the media I am using is the ACLU. They are a global company with millions of followers and supporters. The reason that I am choosing them is because of the amount of followers and I would like for the hood injustice to be recognized more by people with in the society. Another reason that I am choosing to use them is because they deal with the social injustices. They have the resources to make a change as well.

Section four- I believe that for a topic such as this that people are scared to talk about situations such as the Treyvon Martin incident. The reason that I am turning this into the ACLU is because the ACLU is used to dealing with problems such as stereotypes and injustice for certain people. Another reason why I am turning this into the ACLU is because I believe that the ACLU wouldn’t be afraid of bad publicity or backlash from certain people.

Conclusion why is my problem important? The reason it’s important is because I believe in real justice I believe that everyone should be treated fair. Nobody should be put in the position where they are punished or treated unjustly because of what they wear.

Weeks, Linton. “Tragedy Gives The Hoodie A Whole New Meaning.” NPR, NPR, 24 Mar. 2012, www.npr.org/2012/03/24/149245834/tragedy-gives-the-hoodie-a-whole-new-meaning.

“Students Wearing Police Uniforms Exhibit Biased Attention towards Individuals Wearing Hoodies” http://go.galegroup.com/ps/retrieve.do?tabID=T002&resultListType=RESULT_LIST&searchResultsType=SingleTab&searchType=AdvancedSearchForm&currentPosition=1&docId=GALE%7CA480246560&docType=Report&sort=Relevance&contentSegment=&prodId=AONE&contentSet=GALE%7CA480246560&searchId=R3&userGroupName=lom_deltacoll&inPS=true

#elijahwalker #rhetoricallyintheworld

Written by: Rachel Finney

My cultural problem is the battle for drug legalization and regulation. This is an important topic because the drug war has been used to violate the rights of everyone and justify military action in other countries. The prisons in America have become overcrowded by individuals with petty non-violent drug offenses.

The drug policy alliance is a New York City based nonprofit that promotes the decriminalization of responsible drug use, promotion of harm reduction and wants to facilitate an open dialog about drugs between youth, parents, and educators. I would like to encourage an open dialogue about drugs between all individuals as it would encourage more discussion which could bring about a change in mindset for a better world where the government doesn’t persecute people for the substances they put into their body. Young people are the primary target audience because young people are the ones that would care about this issue enough to make changes.

The rhetoric surrounding the war on drugs can be heated at times between the emotional appeals in favor of incarceration for nonviolent drug crimes and the fact based appeals offered by those in favor of decriminalization, legalization and regulation. In an article written by Daniel Patten titled, the mass incarceration of nations and the global war on drugs: comparing the United States’ domestic and foreign drug policies he discusses the mass incarceration of nonviolent crimes and how it has global implications that incarcerate entire countries. This article was published by the Crime and Social Justice Associates which is a magazine/journal appealing to an academic audience interested in reading about civil rights, human rights, international relations, government and political science, civil law and social issues. Daniel Patton has written many different articles on the infotrac database. This article in particular focuses on the tough sentencing surrounding drug offenses and the incarceration boom that the United States has seen in the last 30 years. In California it has been found that more people are incarcerated for nonviolent drug crimes than for murder, rape, and kidnapping combined. Nonviolent offenders are 94% of those incarcerated in federal prisons (Patton). Daniel Patton talks about how crime rates have remained consistent or have decreased while the incarceration rate has skyrocketed. He says, “The tough-on-crime rhetoric has overemphasized crime as a major social problem, leading Americans to irrationally fear crime; this public trepidation, fueled by the media’s obsession with covering crime since the 1980s, has had an impact on the souring incarceration rates.” This is important to keep in mind as the way we criminalize drug use contributes to societal issues.

I have created a poster for the drug policy alliance. I used logos in the design to appeal to logical people but also used pathos in the way that i presented the information about the fears some have about children taking drugs and how it would be if the drugs were instead regulated.

I will circulate the media by taking the steps it takes to post the posters somewhere on campus so that people will see it. I believe it is effective because they will be on display just like other posters are.

In conclusion this is an important topic to speak about because the scope of the problem is so huge and effects everybody from the taxes we pay to the way law enforcement treats everyone individually.

#rachelfinney

*Sugar Tax* - RIA - Final - Dan Long

Rhetorical Intervention Assignment

Introduction Taxation is theft! Many cities in the U.S. have passed legislation favoring a tax on sugary beverages. The health care industry is lobbying for these taxes because they are paying more out of pocket for health problems they claim are directly related to sugary beverages. Meanwhile, the beverage industry has experienced less consumption of sugary beverages in areas affected by the tax, which has caused them to lay off employees due to lack of demand resulting in less supply needed. I care about this topic because consumers should not be burdened by additional taxes due to other consumers’ irresponsible consumption.

Section One

The purpose of my campaign is to create awareness by contacting the American Beverage Association (ABA). I would like to show them that this sugar tax exists, yet nobody is attacking cereal, candy, or any other foods containing sugar. Some cities have even excluded sugary juices containing a small trace of actual fruit juice from the tax. I believe the beverage industry is the victim of a specific attack. If this isn’t true, then why isn’t the health care industry challenging these other products containing sugar? I would like people to understand that taxing sugar is a short term solution because there is an immediate decrease in consumption in most cases where legislation has been passed, but this fades over time as consumers tend to purchase what makes them happy. I want to encourage consumers to research this legislation so they have an opportunity to prevent it from happening. Luckily, Michigan has been proactive by passing legislation banning these taxes, so my target audience is Americans living in areas where there has not been legislation passed on either side of the discussion. The more informed our society is, the better we can combat these taxes before they are enacted. Consumers of sugary beverages understand sugar is bad for their health, and they care about children’s health, so they will blindly follow the argument that sugary beverages are bad. Consumers must understand they need to consume responsibly, and they currently are not, which causes increased costs for health care providers. Consumers should also know health care providers are for profit businesses. The premiums consumers currently pay for insurance should cover the expenses caused by over consumption, but the heal care industry is greedy. They don’t want to spend their own money combating child obesity. Instead, they want to tax the beverages, which burdens the consumer with the responsibility of funding child obesity programs. Consumes must also respect the impact these laws have on the beverage industry. Locations where the taxes are in effect have seen a short term decrease in consumption resulting in employee layoffs due to less demand causing less need for supply.

Section Two

Mt. Dew, Coca Cola, and Pepsi are popular, delicious beverages consumed by millions of Americans daily, but some groups are spending millions of dollars trying to impose taxes on sugar beverages, while others are spending even more money fighting the legislation. The American Beverage Association (ABA) has teamed up with some large fast food restaurants like McDonalds and Burger King in an effort to halt the taxes. On the other end of the argument is the health care industry. They claim sugar is consumed irresponsibly and society is consuming these beverages at a rate that is poorly affecting their personal health. Health Care Providers like The American Heart Association state this over-consumption is leading to rises in health related issues like type 2 diabetes, heart related issues, and obesity, which costs them more money. Why are these groups spending millions lobbying legislation, and what do they stand to lose or gain? The purpose behind the tax is to increase the price resulting in a reduction in demand, which affects the supply required by merchants to fulfill their customers demand. As a result, beverage industries are forced to lay off employees due to less consumer spending on their sugary drinks. Another significant downside to the tax resulting in an increase in price falls on consumers who will be paying more to curb their sweet tooth, but only concerning beverages.

Patz wrote a relevant article titled, “Is Sugar Really That Bad For You?”. Its purpose is to enlighten and educate readers that sugar consumption is acceptable and encouraged with an emphasis on strategic ingestion. It discusses the sugar supplements that are safe like Splenda and Equal, but it also analyzes the substitutes that can potentially cause health issues. She notes raw sugar is not any better than processed sugar because fructose tends to holdup in the liver for longer. This indicates the sugar beverage industry is singled out from the other sugar suppliers like candy makers Mars, Nestle, and Hersey’s. It also portrays how sugar consumption can be done responsibly. (1 Patz)

Every year, the American Beverage Association (2 ABA) spends millions of dollars attempting to disband the possibility that the sugar in their products can pose harmful effects. An article on BeverageDaily.com describes a scenario where the ABA and, authors of the article, do not agree with the validity of a US study suggesting overconsumption of sugar beverages could have adverse effects upon heart disease risk. The original US study is published in the American Heart Association’s journal, Circulation, which is a scientific journal published by Lippincott Williams and Wilkins in the United States. I need to help the ABA create awareness by exploiting the double standard, which is costing millions to defend themselves. (3 De Koning)

Section Three

The American Beverage Association has a website dedicated to current events surrounding these taxes as well as other beverage related issues. I chose this platform because their members consist of distributers, manufacturers, and retail operations, so the audience is vast and would have an interest in propaganda opposing the sugar tax. They also have their own websites that they could utilize to spread the message. Some of the larger members like Coca-Cola, Pepsi Co., and McDonalds could run advertisements on the radio, television, and other forms of social media. Most of the advertising would be relatively cheap, and perhaps they could use my idea to make a more professionally constructed video. (2 ABA)

Section Four

I believe the strongest form of media would be YouTube advertisements. They can be short, direct, and will reach a vast audience. The advertisements could be coordinated with YouTube videos that cover a variety of topics including health, fitness, political propaganda, and whatever the professional marketing team at the ABA believes could be effective. The majority of consumers viewing material on YouTube are typically younger and the material in my message would impact their decisions because their age group is the largest purchasers of sugary beverages. Youtube videos have the option to skip advertisements that are too long, so keeping them under 30 seconds would be beneficial in keeping the viewers engaged in the message.

Conclusion

The topic of sugar and health seems to be convoluted by the potential of profit. The ABA maintains their stance that their products are unfairly scrutinized alongside other sugar products that are not taxed. The health industry stands firm that sugary beverages are causing a health epidemic in the U.S. that is primarily affecting our youth. Both sides have backed their arguments with extensive research and millions of dollars spent on lobbying legislatures to pass or deny new and existing sugar taxes. Consumers must understand that taxation is a temporary, ineffective, and biased way to control consumption of sugary beverages. The health care providers are multibillion dollar companies who are interested in profits. Their motive is to save money by placing more financial responsibility on the consumers as they purchase products they deem hazardous to health.

Works Cited:

Patz, Aviva. “Is Sugar Really That Bad For You?”. https://www.prevention.com/author/aviva-patz. Accessed Nov. 2017. http://www.health.com/health/article/0,,20637702,00.html. Accessed Nov. 2017.

http://www.ameribev.org/

De Koning, Lawrence, Malik, V.S., Kellogg, M.D., Rimm, E.B., Willett, W.C., and Hu, F.B. “Sweetened Beverage Consumption, Incident Coronary Heart disease and Biomarkers”. Journal of the American Heart Association. March 12, 2012. https://www.beveragedaily.com/Article/2012/03/14/ABA-attacks-study-linking-sugar-sweetened-drinks-to-heart-disease. Accessed Nov. 2017.

#danlong #rhetoricallyintheworld

*Sugar Tax* - RIA - Rough Draft - Dan Long

Rhetorical Intervention Assignment

Introduction Taxation is theft! Many Cities in the U.S. have passed legislation favoring a tax on sugary beverages. The health care industry is lobbying for these taxes because they are paying more out of pocket for health problems they claim are directly related to sugary beverages. Meanwhile, the beverage industry has experienced less consumption of sugary beverages in areas affected by the tax, which has caused them to lay off employees due to lack of demand resulting in less supply needed. I care about this topic because consumers should not be burdened by additional taxes due to other consumers’ irresponsible consumption.

Section One

The purpose of my campaign is to create awareness that this sugar tax exists, and that nobody is attacking cereal, candy, or any other foods containing sugar. Some cities have even excluded sugary juices containing a small trace of actual fruit juice from the tax. I believe the beverage industry is the victim of a specific attack. If this isn’t true, then why isn’t the health care industry challenging these other products containing sugar? I would like people to understand that taxing sugar is a short term solution because there is an immediate decrease in consumption in most cases where legislation has been passed, but this fades over time as consumers tend to purchase what makes them happy. I want to encourage consumers to research this legislation so they have an opportunity to prevent it from happening. Luckily, Michigan has been proactive by passing legislation banning these taxes, so my target audience is Americans living in areas where there has not been legislation passed on either side of the discussion. The more informed our society is, the better we can combat these immoral taxes before they are enacted. The audience currently understands sugar is bad for your health, and they care about children’s health, so they will blindly follow the argument that sugary beverages are bad. Consumers must understand they need to consume responsibly, and they currently are not, which causes increased costs for health care providers. Consumers should also know health care providers are for profit businesses. The premiums we currently pay for insurance should cover the expenses caused by over consumption, but the heal care industry is greedy. They don’t want to spend their own money combating child obesity. Instead, they want to tax the beverages, which burdens the consumer with the responsibility of funding child obesity programs. Consumes must also respect the impact these laws have on the beverage industry. Locations where the taxes are in effect have seen a short term decrease in consumption resulting in employee layoffs due to less demand causing less need for supply.

Section Two

Mt. Dew, Coca Cola, and Pepsi are popular, delicious beverages consumed by millions of Americans daily, but some groups are spending millions of dollars trying to impose taxes on sugar beverages, while others are spending even more money fighting the legislation. The American Beverage Association (ABA) has teamed up with some large fast food restaurants like McDonalds and Burger King in an effort to halt the taxes. On the other end of the argument is the health care industry. They claim sugar is consumed irresponsibly and society is consuming these beverages at a rate that is poorly affecting their personal health. Health Care Providers state this over-consumption is leading to rises in health related issues like type 2 diabetes and obesity, which costs them more money. One benefit of the tax is that the U.S. Government is using the funds to promote healthier lifestyles for children. Why are these groups spending millions lobbying legislation, and what do they stand to lose or gain? The purpose behind the tax is to increase the price resulting in a reduction in demand, which affects the supply required by merchants to fulfill their customers demand. As a result, beverage industries are forced to lay off employees due to less consumer spending on their sugary drinks. Another significant downside to the tax resulting in an increase in price falls on consumers who will be paying more to curb their sweet tooth.

I found this image by searching, “does sugar make you fat”. It is sponsored by Just for Hearts, which is a leading workplace wellness company, and their website is listed on the image. The website is filled with links on healthy living, fighting obesity, and conquering addiction, and there are no sponsored ads adding to the credibility of the information provided.

In the picture, the woman is clearly overweight. She is struggling to button her pants, which appear a few sizes smaller than she should be trying on. The half logos half pathos advertisement leads readers to believe this weight gain is due to sugar consumption, and they even show 3 heaping spoons full of sugar in the background of the photo indicating that all types of sugar are unhealthy, and it says, “Did You Know? Eating too much sugar makes you fat”. The word, “sugar” is capitalized and strategically placed directly under the word, “Eating”. The intent is to help the reader make the connection between eating sugar and the image on the left. The bottom right corner displays an attractive woman eating something that looks like yogurt, which is generally believed to be healthy. Studies show the majority of people consume sugar irresponsibly, which leads to health issues. (1)

This type of advertising could help people overcome their dependency on sugar because it manipulates consumers into comparing themselves to the image on the left, while deep down they wish they looked like the image on the right. It is a form of pathos shame advertising, and this example places the blame for your obesity solely on sugar and consumers lack of self-control. The image includes a helpline number in case you need some extra help staying away from sugar.

The following is from an article on sciencedirect.com. It details the cost effectiveness of a sugar-sweetened beverage excise tax in the U.S. The premise for the study quantifies the potential health and economic benefits of a national sugar tax on beverages at a tax rate of $.01 per ounce over 10 years. Based on their calculations, there should be a 3% discount to costs and health gains based on 2015 U.S. population information. The results are interesting and they claim that implementing the tax nationally would cost $51 million in the first year. The tax would reduce sugar-sweetened beverage consumption by 20% and mean Body Mass Index (BMI) by 0.16 units among youth and 0.08 units among adults in the second year for a cost of $3.16 per BMI unit reduced. From 2015 to 2025, the policy would result in $23.6 billion in healthcare cost savings. The tax would generate $12.5 billion in annual revenue. (Cost Effectiveness of a Sugar-Sweetened Beverage Excise Tax in the U.S. This information is significant because it describes the potential benefits of a sugar tax on a nationwide level. (2-Carter)

The authors of the article are all professionals in the medical industry (Dr. Md. PHd.), and their logos approach forces you to acknowledge that there are benefits to a sugar tax, and that there is a serious issue with obesity in our youth. The authors’ logos approach is supported by providing mathematical calculations based on anticipated outcomes and consumer reactions to the tax. Long, Gortmaker, Ward, and Resch are all Harvard graduates and have several years of experience in the health field. Each author has been published numerous times and many of their studies are based around child obesity.

The monetary figures produced by the equation represent an opportunity for the healthcare providers to save $2.36 billion each year, so it is obvious why they are pushing for this legislation to pass in more and more Cities, States, and potentially Countrywide. If sugar is bad for health, then why are they only targeting the beverage industry?

Another relevant article is titled, “Is Sugar Really That Bad For You?”. The authors name is Aviva Patz and she is a “clean-eating, vegetarian beauty junkie”. Patz has been covering multiple wellness topics including health, mental health, nutrition, and relationships for nearly 25 years. Aviva also fronts an alt-rock band, The Hey Honeys, based in Montclair, New Jersey. Patz’s Linkedin profile indicates she is currently a member of the Reader’s Digest Association and has former involvement with Weight Watchers International and Fitness Magazine. Patz is also a graduate of Columbia University where she enrolled in the Graduate School of Journalism. There are not many ads on the website, so that increases the credibility of the source. (3 Patz)

Patz wrote this article on health.com and can be located in the home – food section of the website to enlighten and educate readers that sugar consumption is acceptable and encouraged with an emphasis on strategic ingestion. It discusses the sugar supplements that are safe like Splenda and Equal, but it also analyzes the substitutes that can potentially cause health issues. She notes raw sugar is not any better than processed sugar because fructose tends to holdup in the liver for longer.

Patz’s logos style of writing emphasizes her beliefs and she reinforces it when she quotes David Katz, MD and Director of Yale University in her dialogue, “We actually need sugar; it’s our body’s preferred fuel”. Patz also communicates that there is “perfectly healthy natural sugar found in fruits, some veggies, and milk which makes them taste sweet” and i agree with that statement. She changes her persuasion to pathos when she states, “the added sugar is what we need to limit, but there is no need to completely cut out dessert from our diets”. Patz is relating to the reader and wants them to understand she is not saying to cut sugar completely out of your diet because she agrees with Dr. Katz about healthy natural sugars, and how it provides energy for our bodies to function. Perhaps some of the opponents of the tax have valid reasons why they do not want the price hike on their products.

Every year, the American Beverage Association (ABA) spends millions of dollars attempting to disband the possibility that the sugar in their products can pose harmful effects. An article on BeverageDaily.com describes a scenario where the ABA and, authors of the article, do not agree with the validity of a US study suggesting overconsumption of sugar beverages could have adverse effects upon heart disease risk. The original US study is published in the American Heart Association’s journal, Circulation, which is a scientific journal published by Lippincott Williams and Wilkins in the United States. The journal is currently ranked the fourth best journal in the Cardiac and Cardiovascular Systems category. The authors note an association between type 2 diabetes, obesity, and weight gain to sugar sweetened beverage consumption, but mentions there are too many variables for an accurate study due to age, smoking, and alcohol to determine effects on coronary heart disease. (4 De Koning)

After reading the article, I understand that they would take any opportunity to discredit the health industries research in order to keep their sales afloat. These major companies are profiting from the sale of sugar beverages, so to them it would be worth investing millions in the beginning stages of the implementation of the taxes. They see their profits are being swallowed up by another entity that is not even a true competitor. The health industry is trying to save money that the beverages are costing them, and the beverage industry is trying to maintain and increase their sales.

The tax legislation has not been effective in every city. An article on the ABA website exposes how Cook County Illinois residents opposed the tax post implementation due to the severity of the tax hike and they also protested it is politically toxic, meaning the tax was imposed for the benefit of the health care industry at the expense of the consumers and producers of sugar drinks. A 2009 study showed these taxes do in fact reduce consumption of the certain types of sugar beverages affected by the tax, but these drinks were actually replaced by sugary juices and even beer. In 2017, the tax hit Philadelphia and generated far less revenue than anticipated. The author of the article is unlisted on the website, but upon further examination, I discovered a link to the full article. Basically, the ABA took what they wanted from the actual article to highlight main focus points in favor of their agenda. They use words like, “far less” when the difference between expected revenue, $46.2 million, and actual revenue, $39.5 million, was only $6.7 million, or 15%. (5 Glans)

The full article posted on October 20, 2017, uses the same verbiage, “far less”, as the ABA version when referring to the profit gap. Here, we learn the original authors name is Matthew Glans. Glans started with Heartland in 2007 as a legislative specialist for insurance and finance, and then in 2012 was names a senior policy analyst. A report researching the effects of the tax on sales of 32 stores in Cook County Illinois revealed a decrease in purchasing of 20-30%. The article refers to the tax as a, “sin tax”. Apparently, Michigan has passed legislation pronouncing the State “shall not impose an excise tax on, or enact, enforce, or administer any ordinance, regulation, resolution, policy, rule, or directive imposing a tax or fee on, the manufacture, distribution, wholesale, or retail sale of food for immediate consumption or non-immediate consumption, except as otherwise provided by federal law or a law of this state.” Perhaps more states will follow their lead halting the progress of the health industry.

Section Three

Section Four

Conclusion

Works Cited:

www.justforhearts.org

Carter,Rob C. PhDd, Gortmaker, Steven PhDa, Long, Michael W. ScDa, Moodie, Marj L. DrPHd, Resch, Stephen C. PhDb, Sacks, Gary PhDe, Swinburn, Boyd A. MDef, Ward, Zachary J. MPHb “Cost Effectiveness of a Sugar-Sweetened Beverage Excise Tax in the U.S.”. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0749379715000963#!. Accessed November 2017.

Patz, Aviva. “Is Sugar Really That Bad For You?”. https://www.prevention.com/author/aviva-patz. Accessed Nov. 2017. http://www.health.com/health/article/0,,20637702,00.html. Accessed Nov. 2017.

Glans, Matthew. “Research & Commentary: Soda Taxes Continue to Fall Flat”. http://www.ameribev.org/education-resources/blog/post/new-soda-taxes-continue-to-fall-flat/. Accessed Nov. 2017. https://www.heartland.org/publications-resources/publications/research--commentary-soda-taxes-continue-to-fall-flat. Accessed Nov. 2017.

http://www.ameribev.org/

#danlong #rhetoricallyintheworld

Physician Assisted Suicide RIA Assignment Rough Draft

Introduction:

I care about Physician Assisted Suicide because I feel like it is a subject that everyone should be educated on, because it could affect your life and or a loved ones.

Section One:

The purpose of my campaign is to educate people on the negative effects people have when they discuss PAS being legal.

I would like to encourage the perception that PAS endangers the weak and vulnerable, corrupts the practice of medicine and the doctor-patient relationship, compromises the family and the relationships between family generations and betrays human dignity and equality before law.

I hope to reach all of the readers that are against PAS that way I can inform them more about the effects PAS has on people involved with PAS and or if they were to be involved.

My audiences assumptions about this would be that they encourage what I am informing them about. I know this because of the research I did on the opposers view on PAS and how they would react and or feel about PAS and what I am saying about it.

Section Two:

The conversation of PAS would be people who are affected by PAS personally and emotionally. The literature on my cultural problem is pathos. An example of how it is pathos is

“Kate Cheney, 85, had terminal cancer and told her doctor she wanted assisted suicide. However, he was concerned that she didn't meet the required criteria for mental competence because of dementia. So he declined to write the requested prescription and instead referred her to a psychiatrist by law. She was accompanied to the psychiatric consultation by her daughter. The psychiatrist found that Kate had a loss of short term memory. It also appeared that her daughter had more interest in Cheney’s assisted suicide than the patient did herself....” (”Personal Stories(Assisted Suicide)”).

This example is considered Pathos because it brings out readers emotions and makes them react to this in a certain way.

Section Three:

The forms of media I would use to create my campaign would be Facebook because I feel like people speak their minds more on Facebook than any other form of median. I feel as if my audience would respond to Facebook more than any other form of media because I feel that everyone has a Facebook and not everyone of all ages has a twitter and or know how to use it.

Section Four:

My poster would get to the target audience by making them bring out their emotional side and have them comment on how they feel about PAS and which side they stand on. It will stand out to them by it being creative, colorful and informative. I believe that the strategies for circulating my writing are effective by writing down a rough draft/ outline and get my thoughts going first then touch up the final draft later.

Conclusion:

My campaign is important because it informs the opposers of PAS more about why PAS effects people in a negative way. They should care because it could affect their loved ones or them in the future.

#By: Chelsea Radosa

The war on drugs: a global human rights disaster cpaa

-Rachel Finney

Daniel Patton draws a very interesting parallel between the way that the United States’ incarcerates its own people and the way that the United States conducts foreign policy.

“The present condition of the US criminal justice system has many parallels with the United States' current foreign policy strategy, which has become extremely proactive in initiating war or sanctions if a future threat is deemed probable. Drugs have been a major justification alongside terrorism for this aggressive strategy in countries like Colombia, Afghanistan, Mexico, and Iran. Joining the two major threats together, the term "narcoterrorist" has been used to identify dangerous individuals within these targeted countries” (Patton).

Daniel Patton is arguing that the United States manages foreign countries on the affiliation they have with drug crimes. The way the United States conducts foreign policy has changed since the Reagan era of politics; drug trafficking has been a large justification for the United States intervening in other countries and that in itself is causing large issues in society. Daniel Patton goes in depth in the foreign policy that is employed in Columbia by the United States. He talks about the United States employing sanctions, crop eradication, crop substitution, fumigation, and training foreign officials. The DEA’s main reason for employing these is to reduce the availability of illicit drugs in the United States market. Fumigation is where pesticides are sprayed over the entire country to destroy possible illegal plants from growing. Spraying pesticides into the air has implications on the health of the people living in countries like Columbia. Daniel Patton explains how this is a direct violation of the international humanitarian law established by the international committee for the Red Cross. They have declared that average citizens cannot be subjected to violence that affects their physical or mental health. Spraying pesticides in an attempt to destroy crops falls under the category of violence that affects physical health. Patton talks about the hypocrisies and atrocities the United States continues to commit.

On a global scale the drug war impacts the United States’ relationships with other countries but also impacts each American. American tax dollars are being used to commit acts of violence such as fumigation of other countries. The United States is at the forefront of many human rights violations.

Human rights violations don’t stop at the bored however, inside the United States harsh sentences are given to drug users. Drug trafficking will never stop as long as the drugs are illegal. Erik Sherman, a contributor to Forbes.com wrote an article titled “Nixon’s Drug War, an Excuse to Lock Up Blacks and Protestors. Forbes is considered a popular source. In this article he talks about how the drug war began as a way to incarcerate minorities and anybody that opposed the administration. The anti-drug rhetoric caused people to associate hippies with cannabis as well as associating heroin with the black population. Criminalizing drugs meant that they could incarcerate those groups of people, raid their homes, break up meetings etc. Erik Sherman talks about how the rhetoric on drugs at that time may have caused people to assume the people pushing to criminalize drugs could have actually believed they were doing the right thing. Nixon had a large list of enemies and that caused him to be paranoid. Nixon was willing to destroy lives to stay in power. The criminalization of drug users effectively creates a fear in American citizens. The way the media portrays drug addicts and drug traffickers as low-life thugs that don’t deserve basic rights or decency causes a lot of problems in society. Those who are minorities or poor get hit the hardest by the policies put into place. Erik Sherman is a freelance journalist, author, and writer whose work has been in the Wall Street Journal, The New York Times Magazine, Newsweek, Technology Review, Chief Executive, and the Fiscal Times, as well as CBS Money Watch, Inc.com, and Daily Finance. He has written ten non-fiction books. He doesn’t write for an academic audience but being a journalist he more than likely has a decent understanding of what he is talking about.

There are people that oppose facts when it comes to the inefficacy of the war on drugs. In an article on Mic.com written by James Banks, he gives 4 reasons why the drug war should continue. James banks seems to think that the rhetoric in favor of legalization is based on unsubstantiated claims and misleading statistics. James Banks claims that the government spends as much on therapy for legal drugs as it does on containing illegal drugs. He cites Harvard economist Jeffrey A. Miron in a pro-legalization study that said $32.7 billion in tax revenue could be collected by the sales of recreational drugs. James banks counters this by saying that the government spends about $72 billion each hear on treating individuals addicted to painkillers. He claims that deaths from legal drugs have increased 400% among women and 265% among men. This statistic has no citation and doesn’t seem to be a credible claim. Yes, legal drugs are a problem but the regulation of them allows addicts to seek treatment where the illegality of other substances causes law enforcement to intervene where they are not qualified. James Banks for some reason seems to think that recreational drug use would cause users to be less productive which other countries like Portugal and Switzerland have proven that drug users can be productive members of society. James Banks cites a study from the National Bureau of Economic Research that supposedly concluded that cannabis use has about the same impact on one’s educational attainment as growing up in a single parent home.

The last reason he gives is that legalizing drugs would make low income individuals more vulnerable. He says the government making money isn’t a good thing if they make it from the wrong individuals. James Banks claims that making drugs more expensive has caused wealthy individuals to do drugs more than smoke cigarettes. This argument just doesn’t make any sense.

works cited: (in progress)

Patten, Daniel. "The mass incarceration of nations and the global war on drugs: comparing the United States' domestic and foreign drug policies." Social Justice, vol. 43, no. 1, 2017, p. 85+. Academic OneFile, go.galegroup.com/ps/i.do?p=AONE&sw=w&u=lom_deltacoll&v=2.1&id=GALE%7CA462786544&it=r&asid=3b25e41c265f72fd3d054ed9a0b4f0b7. Accessed 8 Nov. 2017.

#rachelfinney

People N Hoods Final

People N Hoods

Elijah Walker

Professor Lewis

10/25/17

English 112

The reason that I have begun researching the stereotypes in hoodies is because in my eyes I do not understand how a piece of clothing can lead people to determine how a person behaves or how a person acts. How can a piece of clothing determine if a person is representing a gang or if they are criminals?

http://www.npr.org/2012/03/24/149245834/tragedy-gives-the-hoodie-a-whole-new-meaning

The article “Tragedy Gives The Hoodie A Whole New Meaning,” written by Linton Weeks shows how people can make assumptions of the world and make a clothing piece have a whole new meaning. The hoodie has become a negative concept in the society today. In the article it is recognized in saying that, the hoodie as of right now cannot be redeemed. Some people would even go as far to say that if people do not want to be labeled for wearing the hoodie then they should stop wearing them (Linton Weeks). This is an example of logos based off of the facts and opinions that are being presented within the article. He broke each part of his topic down in the article by listing both sides of the argument in varying substances. In the society it is believed that in some families wearing the hoodie is a type of symbol or a type of stand against all the events that has happened due to the labeling that certain families. The way that this affects me is because being a young male who grew up during the time where hoodies are at its most popular and most controversial, it became a struggle to deal with because my mother would often tell me that I couldn’t have my hoodie up even though it’s the style. I was upset with this but it’s because in the society its unknown how people react when they see people dressed a certain way and she didn’t want me to be classified with negative activities.

http://go.galegroup.com/ps/retrieve.do?tabID=T002&resultListType=RESULT_LIST&searchResultsType=SingleTab&searchType=AdvancedSearchForm&currentPosition=1&docId=GALE%7CA480246560&docType=Report&sort=Relevance&contentSegment=&prodId=AONE&contentSet=GALE%7CA480246560&searchId=R3&userGroupName=lom_deltacoll&inPS=true

The next article “Students wearing Police uniforms exhibit biased attention towards individuals wearing hoodies” written by Ciro Civile, Sukhvinder Obhi. In this article it was being researched on the polices reaction time to people based off of what they were wearing. There were four groups of people that the police interacted with and only one group of people the reaction time increase by. It was the people wearing a hoodie that the police were cautious about proving that they were profiling the individuals based off of what they were wearing. This article shows the way that the society feels about people who wear hoodies. This proves that this would be Ethos based off of peoples personal opinion of the hoodie giving the article a deeper meaning. Even if they are simply walking down the street our society feels as if they need to be watching out for that person. I feel like there is nothing that anyone can do to change society’s opinion over the hoodie. People will always associate negativity with the hoodie.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F0ghNxkW9iI

In the video “One Million Hoodie March” aaronjround1 it’s an interview about how certain civilians feel about what has happened in the event of Trayvon Martyn incident. Provoking and emotional appeal out of the audience making it ethos. For example, a person being interviewed in the video claims that as a society people have made a racial separation in clothes and the way that people behave. People believed that there is a divide among people who see a hoodie as a symbol for negativity and nothing else. The video is made in a interview type of format that is asking different people questions getting their opinion on things happening within the society. For certain people they are trying to erase that thought by doing a march of thousands and possibly a million people to represent a positive idea of a hoodie does not determine who a person is. I one hundred percent agree with this video. I think that this won’t change people’s minds over the stereotype but I do think that it is a start to change people’s mind set about what clothing mean.

I don’t understand what makes people decide that a piece of clothing can determine who a person is. I don’t think that people can change their opinion on it based off of the articles that I have read and the video that I have watched but I do believe that the severity of the stereotype can be weakened. All the information that I have found all agree on one thing. There is a divide among our society. It seems though that none of these articles states where exactly this stereotype comes from. So that will be something that I may try to research next. As for the larger conversation it almost seems as if articles are afraid to dive in to this conversation. They are careful with what they say but their information is useful but there is so much more that could be discussed.

work cited

One Million Hoodies March for Trayvon Martin Minnesota - BROTHER ALI INTERVIEW

aaronjround1 - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F0ghNxkW9iI

Tragedy Gives The Hoodie A Whole New Meaning

Linton Weeks - http://www.npr.org/2012/03/24/149245834/tragedy-gives-the-hoodie-a-whole-new-meaning

#elijahwalker #rhetoricallyintheworld

What is Sweeter: Money or Sugar? -Daniel Long - CPAA - FINAL

Mt. Dew, Coca Cola, and Pepsi are popular, delicious beverages consumed by millions of Americans daily, but some groups are spending millions of dollars trying to impose taxes on sugar beverages, while others are spending even more money fighting the legislation. The American Beverage Association (ABA) has teamed up with some large fast food restaurants like McDonalds and Burger King in an effort to halt the taxes. On the other end of the argument is the health care industry. They claim sugar is consumed irresponsibly and society is consuming these beverages at a rate that is poorly affecting their personal health. Health Care Providers state this over-consumption is leading to rises in health related issues like type 2 diabetes and obesity, which costs them more money. One benefit of the tax is that the U.S. Government is using the funds to promote healthier lifestyles for children. Why are these groups spending millions lobbying legislation, and what do they stand to lose or gain? The purpose behind the tax is to increase the price resulting in a reduction in demand, which affects the supply required by merchants to fulfill their customers demand. As a result, beverage industries are forced to lay off employees due to less consumer spending on their sugary drinks. Another significant downside to the tax resulting in an increase in price falls on consumers who will be paying more to curb their sweet tooth.

The following is from an article on sciencedirect.com. It details the cost effectiveness of a sugar-sweetened beverage excise tax in the U.S. The premise for the study quantifies the potential health and economic benefits of a national sugar tax on beverages at a tax rate of $.01 per ounce over 10 years. Based on their calculations, there should be a 3% discount to costs and health gains based on 2015 U.S. population information. The results are interesting and they claim that implementing the tax nationally would cost $51 million in the first year. The tax would reduce sugar-sweetened beverage consumption by 20% and mean Body Mass Index (BMI) by 0.16 units among youth and 0.08 units among adults in the second year for a cost of $3.16 per BMI unit reduced. From 2015 to 2025, the policy would result in $23.6 billion in healthcare cost savings. The tax would generate $12.5 billion in annual revenue. (Cost Effectiveness of a Sugar-Sweetened Beverage Excise Tax in the U.S.Michael W.LongScDaSteven .GortmakerPhDaZachary J.WardMPHbStephen C.ReschPhDbMarj L.MoodieDrPHdGarySacksPhDeBoyd A.SwinburnMDefRob C.CarterPhDd http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0749379715000963#!) This information is significant because it describes the potential benefits of a sugar tax on a nationwide level.

Another relevant article is titled, “Is Sugar Really That Bad For You?”. The authors name is Aviva Patz and she is a “clean-eating, vegetarian beauty junkie”. Patz has been covering multiple wellness topics including health, mental health, nutrition, and relationships for nearly 25 years. Aviva also fronts an alt-rock band, The Hey Honeys, based in Montclair, New Jersey. (https://www.prevention.com/author/aviva-patz). Patz’s Linkedin profile indicates she is currently a member of the Reader’s Digest Association and has former involvement with Weight Watchers International and Fitness Magazine. Patz is also a graduate of Columbia University where she enrolled in the Graduate School of Journalism. There are not many ads on the website, so that increases the credibility of the source.

Patz’s logos style of writing emphasizes her beliefs and she reinforces it when she quotes David Katz, MD and Director of Yale University in her dialogue, "We actually need sugar; it's our body's preferred fuel". Patz also communicates that there is “perfectly healthy natural sugar found in fruits, some veggies, and milk which makes them taste sweet” and i agree with that statement. She changes her persuasion to pathos when she states, “the added sugar is what we need to limit, but there is no need to completely cut out dessert from our diets”. Patz is relating to the reader and wants them to understand she is not saying to cut sugar completely out of your diet because she agrees with Dr. Katz about healthy natural sugars, and how it provides energy for our bodies to function. Perhaps some of the opponents of the tax have valid reasons why they do not want the price hike on their products. (http://www.health.com/health/article/0,,20637702,00.html)

Every year, the American Beverage Association (ABA) spends millions of dollars attempting to disband the possibility that the sugar in their products can pose harmful effects. An article on BeverageDaily.com describes a scenario where the ABA and Lawrence de Koning, V.S. Malik, M.D. Kellogg, E.B. Rimm, W.C. Willett, and F.B Hu, authors of the article, do not agree with the validity of a US study suggesting overconsumption of sugar beverages could have adverse effects upon heart disease risk. The original US study is published in the American Heart Association’s journal, Circulation, which is a scientific journal published by Lippincott Williams and Wilkins in the United States. The journal is currently ranked the fourth best journal in the Cardiac and Cardiovascular Systems category. (https://www.beveragedaily.com/Article/2012/03/14/ABA-attacks-study-linking-sugar-sweetened-drinks-to-heart-disease). The authors note an association between type 2 diabetes, obesity, and weight gain to sugar sweetened beverage consumption, but mentions there are too many variables for an accurate study due to age, smoking, and alcohol to determine effects on coronary heart disease.

The tax legislation has not been effective in every city. An article on the ABA website, (http://www.ameribev.org/education-resources/blog/post/new-soda-taxes-continue-to-fall-flat/), exposes how Cook County Illinois residents opposed the tax post implementation due to the severity of the tax hike and they also protested it is politically toxic, meaning the tax was imposed for the benefit of the health care industry at the expense of the consumers and producers of sugar drinks. A 2009 study showed these taxes do in fact reduce consumption of the certain types of sugar beverages affected by the tax, but these drinks were actually replaced by sugary juices and even beer. In 2017, the tax hit Philadelphia and generated far less revenue than anticipated. The author of the article is unlisted on the website, but upon further examination, I discovered a link to the full article. Basically, the ABA took what they wanted from the actual article to highlight main focus points in favor of their agenda. They use words like, “far less” when the difference between expected revenue, $46.2 million, and actual revenue, $39.5 million, was only $6.7 million, or 15%.

The full article posted here on October 20, 2017, (https://www.heartland.org/publications-resources/publications/research--commentary-soda-taxes-continue-to-fall-flat) uses the same verbiage, “far less”, as the ABA version when referring to the profit gap. Here, we learn the original authors name is Matthew Glans. Glans started with Heartland in 2007 as a legislative specialist for insurance and finance, and then in 2012 was names a senior policy analyst. A report researching the effects of the tax on sales of 32 stores in Cook County Illinois revealed a decrease in purchasing of 20-30%. The article refers to the tax as a, “sin tax”. Apparently, Michigan has passed legislation pronouncing the State “shall not impose an excise tax on, or enact, enforce, or administer any ordinance, regulation, resolution, policy, rule, or directive imposing a tax or fee on, the manufacture, distribution, wholesale, or retail sale of food for immediate consumption or non-immediate consumption, except as otherwise provided by federal law or a law of this state.” Perhaps more states will follow their lead halting the progress of the health industry.

The topic of sugar and health seems to be convoluted by the potential of profit. The ABA maintains their stance that their products are unfairly scrutinized alongside other sugar products that are not taxed. The health industry stands firm that sugary beverages are causing a health epidemic in the U.S. that is primarily affecting our youth. Both sides have valid arguments and have backed them up with extensive research and millions of dollars spent on lobbying legislatures to pass or deny new and existing sugar taxes. Both sides of the debate agree that sugar has the capability of creating serious health issues if not consumed responsibly. Both sides also agree that sugar is not something consumers should avoid completely because natural sugars found in fruits, veggies, and milk have positive health benefits.

#danlong #rhetoricallyintheworld

People N Hoods rough draft

Elijah Walker

Professor Lewis

10/25/17

English 112

http://www.npr.org/2012/03/24/149245834/tragedy-gives-the-hoodie-a-whole-new-meaning

The article “Tragedy Gives The Hoodie A Whole New Meaning,” written by Linton Weeks shows how people can make assumptions of the world and make a clothing piece have a whole new meaning. The hoodie has become a negative concept in the society today. In the article it is recognized in saying that, the hoodie as of right now cannot be redeemed. Some people would even go as far to say that if people do not want to be labeled for wearing the hoodie then they should stop wearing them (Linton Weeks). In the society it is believed that in some families wearing the hoodie is a type of symbol or a type of stand against all the events that has happened due to the labeling that certain families. The way that this affects me is because being a young male who grew up during the time where hoodies are at its most popular and its most controversial it became a struggle to deal with because my mother would often tell me that I couldn’t have my hoodie up even though it’s the style. I was upset with this but it’s because in the society its unknown how people react when they see people dressed a certain way and she didn’t want me to be classified with negative activities.

The next article “Students wearing Police uniforms exhibit biased attention towards individuals wearing hoodies” written by Ciro Civile, Sukhvinder Obhi. In this article it was being researched on the polices reaction time to people based off of what they were wearing. There were four groups of people that the police interacted with and only one group of people the reaction time increase by. It was the people wearing a hoodie that the police were cautious about proving that they were profiling the individuals based off of what they were wearing. This article shows the way that the society feels about people who wear hoodies. Even if they are simply walking down the street our society feels as if they need to be watching out for that person. I feel like there is nothing that anyone can do to change society’s opinion over the hoodie. People will always associate negativity with the hoodie.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F0ghNxkW9iI

In the video “One Million Hoodie March” aaronjround1 it’s an interview about how certain civilians feel about what has happened in the event of Trayvon Martyn. People believed that there is a divide among people who see a hoodie as a symbol for negativity and nothing else. For certain people they are trying to erase that thought by doing a march of thousands and possibly a million people to represent a positive idea of a hoodie does not determine who a person is. I one hundred percent agree with this video. I think that this won’t change people’s minds over the stereotype but I do think that it is a start to change people’s mind set about what clothing mean.

#elijahwalker #rhetoricallyintheworld

C.P.A.A Chelsea Radosa

Physician Assisted Suicide is a serious topic trending in America, and there are groups that support PAS under specific circumstances. There are also groups opposing PAS because they believe nobody should have the right to end their life. Why are there such strong arguments and who are these groups made up of.

People against PAS state that it will endanger the weak and vulnerable, corrupt the practice of medicine and the patient-doctor relationship, compromise the family and the relationship between the family generations, and betray human dignity and equality before law. They also state that physicians are always to care and never to kill.

People for PAS state that it is fundamentally an individual choice, and one that should not be limited by laws. They believe that individuals have the right to make life and death decisions for themselves without government interference. Supporters of legalization are responding to the fear of being in terrible pain and agony, of being hooked up to life-support equipment and of becoming a financial or emotional drain on their families. They fear becoming dependent on others or having a very poor quality of life.

Within the information I presented I feel as if it made me understand clearly each sides of the arguments for or against PAS and understand their points behind what they were saying. It also makes me have a more clearer understanding of how PAS effects people from both sides of the argument and how it makes them feel.

From what I have all stated my opinion is honestly in between, for me to be for PAS I would have to say its okay under certain circumstances. I am also against it because I feel as if a physician your job should be to prevent life from dying not to help the weak and or anyone die.

This essay opens doors to other essays on this topic because it gives me a more clear understanding of both sides for or against PAS and more information on why or why not it should be legal.

Works Cited:

https://www.growthhouse.org/mortals/mort2527.html

http://www.newsweek.com/physician-assisted-suicide-always-wrong-317042

https://youtu.be/vUBMD0yI-N0

(The third cite is a video of how PAS works and how the idea got started)

Blog Post #4 -Daniel Long

The cultural analysis assignment is designed for us to research and debate a cultural problem that affects us on a personal level. We are supposed to gain an understanding of both sides of the argument through our research, then describe how we are persuaded by the information in the articles. We must prepare the analysis as if we are communicating the information to industry professionals as well as our classmates.

Most of the information I have discovered is in favor of the tax, so my challenge has been trying to find factual evidence against the legislation. Also, both parties have financial motivators behind their arguments and they both refer back to how sugar affects health. One side describes sugar being the leading cause of obesity and type 2 diabetes. Their studies are based on years of research and they do prove that sugar is indeed bad for your body and overall health. The other side provides studies that show there are no harmful affects if the products are consumed responsibly. They also have an economical argument concerning job loss due to a decrease in demand therefore leading to less consumption. They argue that the tax is discriminating against the poor because they are the largest consumers of sugary beverages, but I have not been able to find a legitimate source.

I have also been projecting too much of my personal opinion into this project. I keep trying to find the solution to the issue, but I need to focus on presenting the facts on both sides of the argument, then describing how these facts lead me to lean one way or the other. I need to think more about who is making the claims and focus on why they are dedicating so many assets toward controlling the outcome of the legislation. The point of this class and assignment is to make us think more about who is trying to persuade us and what their motivations are so that we are able to decipher advertising, sales, marketing, and political gimmicks thrown at us daily in real world situations.

Going forward, I plan to present the facts reported by the groups against the tax. I have been neglecting them because they were not what I was looking for to prove my point, but now I understand it's not about proving anything. It's about informing my audience of the cultural problem, stating the facts and how I interpret them, and allowing the reader to make an informed decision based on my opinion on the matter. As much as I need to show both sides equally, I also have to incorporate persuasion into my writing in order to make the audience think and feel the way I want them to. There is no point in complaining on paper if you aren't trying to change someone's opinion.

#danlong #rhetoricallyintheworld

Blog 4

Written by: Rachel Finney

In the Cultural Problem Analysis Assignment, I am supposed to do exploratory research and write about my cultural problem which is, drug policy/decriminalization/legalization. I am meant to expand on a cultural problem by discussing the conversations about the cultural problem. Then I will consider the different types of sources and discuss the usefulness and credibility of the sources while making connections to the cultural problem as well. The project should be written in first and third person.

So far I have gathered many sources and analyzed the information within the sources which could possibly help me with my cultural problem analysis assignment. The main challenges for me are finding the time to actually put the assignment together as well as staying on topic as I tend to get pulled in many different directions when writing about topics that I care about. I also have a hard time looking at the arguments against legalization simply because of the fact that many of the arguments I come across don’t seem to be based in facts or research. I don’t usually see the value in using emotional arguments that don’t appeal to logic or evidence as usually it is only propaganda. The way that I can deal with this issue is to analyze the emotional arguments and give facts that contradict their emotion based arguments, which will help with the rhetorical analysis of the arguments encompassing my topic.

#rachelfinney #rhetoricallyintheworld

Blog #4

The cultural problem analysis assignment that is being written is going to be about building a rhetorical profile. the job of the rhetorical artifact is to influence its readers into thinking a certain way. My job within this assignment is to argue both sides of this argument but not to claim that I’m right about whichever side that I agree with mostly but to analyze the argument in full detail. The way that this assignment will be written is by looking at people who don’t see clothing as a means for judging someone and will deny that any judgment is going on and to look at the people who believe that judgment based off of clothes is occurring.

The progress that I have made so far on my cultural analysis assignment is I have found many sources that believe that clothing is a big cause for stereotypes. I am still in the finding process for the argumentative side. The main problem that I am having with this is finding a good artifact that can be used to argue against the side that believes that clothes and stereotypes exist or are a problem among society. The way that I can deal with this problem is by digging deeper and look outside of just articles I can look at videos or go on conversations on other blogs. Those are some alternatives that I can use to deal with this problem.

#rhetoricallyintheworld #elijahwalker

Blog post 3

Written By: Rachel Finney

This video that I chose is an interview with Johann Hari, the author of the book Chasing the Scream: The First and Last Days of the War on Drugs; from the David Pakman Show. Johann Hari explains how the “War on Drugs” exacerbates the violence in America. Johann uses logic to argue for the decriminalization and legalization of drugs. He uses statistics and cites studies as well as first hand accounts of his visit to heroin clinics in Switzerland. He uses emotional appeals very selectively, most likely because emotional appeals usually need to also appeal to logic when talking about drug legalization so that the arguements in favor of legalization are taken seriously by any and everybody.

He talks about how if a liquor store gets robbed they call the cops and there are legal avenues to take care of the violence; but, when a drug dealer gets robbed they are forced into acts of theatrical violence and intimidation due to the fact that there are no legal entities to go through to ensure the safety. He talks about how when the head of the DEA was asked what she thought about the 60,000 civilian deaths in Mexico in the last 7 years, that were caused by the War on Drugs she said that, “It’s a sign of the success in the war on drugs.”

He also talks about how the decriminalization of drugs in Portugal positively affected the population of Portugal. Portugal was overwhelmed with drug abuse and crime in the early 2000’s. They kept trying the “American way” by arresting and imprisoning more people and each year the problem in Portugal kept getting worse. In the year 2000 the prime minister and the leader of the opposition got together to think of a way to stop the drug problem. They set up a panel of scientists and doctors that deliberated for a year and a half on what they could do to solve it. The plan that they came up with was to decriminalize all drugs and the money that they used to spend on arresting and imprisoning drug addicts would be used to reconnect the drug addicts to society. They wanted to make sure that every single drug addict had a reason to get out of bed every morning. They would help them get jobs and set up small businesses. Injecting drug use decreased 50 percent, street crime went down, overdose deaths went down massively, and HIV transmission between addicts went down.

Johann Hari explains how decriminalization should be a route to legalization. He explains how in Switzerland they legalized heroin. If you are a heroin addict you go to a doctor and they will assign you to a clinic and you can go to the clinic three times a day to get your heroin legally and safely. These clinics have not had a single overdose and most of the addicts have jobs and are getting their lives together.

Johann also talks about experiments that were done earlier in the 20th century involving a rat in a cage with two water bottles. One water bottle contains pure water and the other water bottle is laced with cocaine or heroin. The rat in the cage will always prefer the drug water and will end up killing itself. In the 70’s, Bruce Alexander conducted a similar experiment but instead of putting a rat in an empty cage he put multiple rats into a “rat park” where they could do anything that the rat could possibly want to do as well as the two water bottles. In his experience the rats in rat park didn’t prefer the drug water or they rarely even used it. His conclusion was that addiction is an adaptation to the environment that one is surrounded by. If what drives addiction is disconnection then arresting them and separating them from society is effectively hurting the whole problem that the “War on Drugs” was supposed to stop.

#rachelfinney #rhetoricallyintheworld

The War on Drugs as a form of slavery/terrorism -Blogpost 2

Written By: Rachel Finney

I am researching drug policy/the “War on Drugs” and its effects on society. The “War on Drugs,” and the policy surrounding it is worth our attention because prohibition exacerbates the issues society has with drug abuse and systemic racism.

The article I found written by Deborah Small called, “The war on drugs is a war on racial justice,” makes a compelling comparison between the incarceration of black and Latino populations of America to slavery.

This article is an academic source that was published in the Social Research journal by the New School for Social Research which is a journal that covers international social and political science for an academic audience. When I searched for Deborah Small’s name I found many articles and interviews which alluded to her credibility as a source of information on drug policy reform.

Deborah quotes John Flateau when he said in 1996 that, “Metaphorically, the criminal justice pipeline is like a slave ship, transporting human cargo along interstate triangular trade routes from Black and Brown communities; through the middle passage of police precincts, holding pens, detention centers and courtrooms; to downstate jails or upstate prisons; back to communities as rehabilitated escapees; and back to prison or jail in a vicious recidivist cycle.” I found this quote to be very interesting as it very clearly lays out the comparison in one very easy-to-follow sentence.

The article has many statistics that help add to her point that the justice system disproportionately effects minorities. Deborah Small uses statistics from Human Rights Watch to further prover her points. One in particular is that “Blacks constitute only 13 percent of all drug users, but 35 percent of those arrested for drug possession, 55 percent of those convicted, and 74 percent of those sent to prison (Human Rights Watch, 2000a).” This statistic is important in her comparison because it really shows how the enforcement of the laws is effecting minorities. The disproportionate arrests and media coverage help feed the profiling of minority populations which continues to serve as justification to continue the horrendous act of profiling.

Political leaders in America continue to enforce the racist myth that violence is a product of illegal drugs and gangs which is simply untrue. The prosecution of drug laws and mandatory sentencing causes America to imprison more people for nonviolent drug crimes than all of the violent crimes which clearly shows that these laws are not in the interest of public safety. The war on drugs is not about drugs, because if it was, white individuals would be criminalized at the same rate but data shows that is not how it is in America.

In addition to the comparison between slavery and the “war on drugs,” the same comparison can be used between the drug war and terrorism. Terrorism is defined as, “the unlawful use of violence and intimidation. Especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims.” The drug laws are used to justify violence and intimidation against civilians and the “War on Drugs” has always been a politically motivated concept brought forward by politicians.

Social Research. Academic OneFile, go.galegroup.com/ps/i.do?p=AONE&sw=w&u=lom_deltacoll&v=2.1&it=aboutJournal&id=GALE|2267. Accessed 11 Oct. 2017.

#rachelfinney #rhetoricallyintheworld

Trending Blogs

Recently Viewed Blogs

The Think Machine