TOW #18- visual

Brandon Stanton is a photographer from New York who created a blog called "Humans of New York."  He documents the everyday lives of humans and the struggles or feats that they run into.  More specifically, Brandon photographed a young man walking home from school.  This photo went viral as the young man goes to a troubled school in the projects yet still succeeds in life and is surrounded by people that want him to succeed,  Yet as we look closer as to why this photo blew up on the internet, Brandon's appeal to pathos and use of color attract the audience into this photo.
  Brandon wants others to hear the young man's story, and he does this through capturing the image while the young man is half smiling attracts the audience into the photo.  This half smile shows all of the struggles that the boy has faced and continues to face, yet also shows the motivation and true happiness that he has.
The happiness that the young man has even though he faces struggles everyday, like not knowing if he will have dinner at night, is truly amazing.  The use of minimal colors in the photo sets up a somber vibe that appeals to pathos by pulling out the remorseful emotions of the audience.  The black jacket and hoodie and the dull grey background of impoverished Brooklyn make the photo even more meaningful.
Brandon's goal was to show the world the story of this young man, and he did so in one photo by appealing to pathos with the boys half smile, and using colors to his advantage to capture the audience.

SNOWDAY TOW (Bet with Mr. Yost)

America is a country that claims it is the land of the free and stands on principles of democracy and easy going government, yet clearly today we are a time of separation within our government.  In the online edition of The New Yorker, columnist and professor at NYU in Economics Paul Krugman wrote an article on "How America Was Lost."  He addresses the divide today in political parties and the chaos that follows it.  He uses rhetorical questions and slight humor to achieve his purpose of getting the audience to understand why the republican party has fallen so far off.
Krugman first uses a rhetorical question, where he asks those who are reading the New Yorker, "So why do I say that only one party has gone off the deep end?"  He leaves this question up in the air for interpretation for the readers to answer it, but then answers it himself by telling readers to compare the Democratic Debates versus the Republican debates.  This engages the audience yet provides an answer later for them to comprehend as well.
Krugman has the audience engaged, and uses slight humor to make his dull topic something of interest.  As he finishes the article with a solution on how to make the republican party better, he adds, "Maybe we should all be wearing hats that say 'Make American Governable Again'."  This adds something of humor to the article so that readers are left with a positive and light impression over a very serious topic, yet at the same time readers are given a viewpoint that is ironically true about our country.
America is a country that should be governed by those who agree with each other, and do not insult other politicians just to gain more votes from the people.  Krugman uses rhetorical questions and appeals to pathos through adding humor in the article to inform the audience why the republican party has fallen into the deep end, and how we may be able to fix our government system.

TOW #17- Is Humanity Getting Better? (non-fiction)

From millions of years ago when the earth formed, to today, where we as a society determine how the earth continues to be formed, the question if we are getting better remains among many.  Is humanity getting better?  Or are we simply adjusting to the way everyday life is, so it merely is an illusion that we are "advancing" into the future.  Writer for the New York Times, Leif Wenar, who is a renowned professor at Oxford University and well known writer for the Times, touches on this so commonly asked question, and uses anecdotes and real data to prove his point, that indeed, society is getting better.
To start off his essay, he recalls London in 1665, while it was being ravaged by the Black Plague.  He tells short anecdotes from this era and place to show what life was like back then.  He recalls how the "government" at the time ordered hunters to kill all the cats and dogs for example. This is an appeal to pathos and logos too, as it provides information and emotional attachment to the essay to gain the readers attention immediately once they begin reading it.  Once he has their attention, he moves along to spit facts about how we truly are getting better.
Wenar goes into details using real data to prove that we are getting better in humanity.  He refers to Joshua Goldstein, a successful and credible writer as well.  He quotes Josh from his essay "How we are winning the war on war."  We do still have many wars and conflicts today, but as the world grows, the casualties decrease. and the amount of peace increases.  Specifically, Wenar quotes from Goldstien that "In the first half of the twentieth century, world wars killed tens of millions and left whole continents in ruins."  This data is used to appeal to logos, as it applies to the more logical side of the argument.  It shows that we are getting better, because we do not have World Wars that leave millions dead.
By simlpy utilising anecdotes and facts, Leif Wenar succesffuly answers and argues his answer to the question of "Is Humanity Getting Better?"

Introduction to IRB #3- The Big Short

Michael Lewis, the author of The Blind Side and Moneyball, published The Big Short a few years ago. It is based off a true story about how a few financial nerd analysts predicted the economic collapse in 2008 and made millions off of it. Now a major motion picture, The Big Short reveals the lucrativeness of the financial world. 

TOW #16- The Front Lines non-fiction)

The conflicts in the Middle East occurring now with ISIS, The Kurds, and regular Iraqi civilians are a testament to the damaged world we live in today. The Middle East is filled with more good than bad, yet naturally the media only broadcasts the bad that occurs. In last weeks Janurary issue of the New York Times, Luke Mogelson wrote a piece of the Iraqi citizens and Kurish forces that fight for their right to live against the Islamic state.  Mogelson, an award winning writer, uses captivating diction and anecdotes from Iraqis to inform the public of those who are on the front lines in Iraq, fighting against evil. 

The captivating diction that Mogelson uses allows the reader to imagine exactly what is going on, while captivating them to read more. He writes, "Its metal shutter lay on the sidewalk in a heap, like unfurled cloth" (Mogelson). This use of descriptive language engages the reader and gives them a perspective of what he was viewing in the destroyed Iraqi village. This is an appeal to pathos as well, as the wreckage that he is describing is a devastating outcome of the battle between good and bad. 

Once he captures the readers, he begins to tell an anecdote of one Iraqi soldiers life, providing a first hand viewpoint of what it is like to live in a war torn country. When telling about a young Sunni fighter's life, he quotes what they said, stating "I can't take this anymore! They're killing our families fifteen minutes away from here!" This places the reader in the shoes of one in Iraq, and changes their viewpoint of what it is like having to deal with living next door to terrorists. 

From captivating diction to anecdotes of those who have first hand experience living in Iraq, Mongelson successfuly writes an article explaining the horrors that take place in the fight against the Islamic state, but the goods that are going against the evils, which the media fails to present to the rest of the world. 

TOW #15- Cartoon Contest (Visual)

Each year, the New York Times does a cartoon contest where anyone can participate in.  Kids, teachers, students, and more are allowed to submit their drawings.  The cartoon above was drawn by  14 year old, Elise Mccomb.  Although Mccomb may just be a freshman in high school, her understanding of modern day politics and the issues that The United States face with immigration is an issue that needs to be addressed. By using guilt and harsh diction, Mccomb won the contest and produced a meaningful cartoon. 

The guilt that the 14 year old student used was in her drawling itself. She using Dora, a lovable fictional character to make the reader feel guilty that Trump is yelling at her. The reader is then hooked into cartoon once they feel emotion. Her appeal to pathos here is then further exemplified with the guilty diction she uses. She writes "where should we go next?" In an innocent manner to appeal to pathos even more. 

Mccomb then uses harsh diction coming out of Trumps mouth  to make the reader feel bad for Dora. The use of red outline of the speech bubble also makes his words seem more violent as well. 

Through her appeal to pathos throughout this cartoon, this 14 year old student successfuly creates a winning cartoon with meaning behind it. 

TOW #14- Secret Promoter (non-fiction)

A$AP Yams, one of the leading contributors to the success of many rap artists due to his powerful promotional skills and connections he made throughout his life, died last year of "acute mixed-drug intoxication."  In the December issue of the New York Times magazine, "The Lives They Lived" is a section that they do annually to honor those who passed away in the given year.  A$AP Yams, also known as Steven Rodriguez was among those honored in the 2015 "The Lives They Lived" issue.  Amos Barshad, author of the article and writer for the New York Times, honors Rodriguez's life so gracefully by using captivating diction and having a positive outlook on Yams life.
Barshad's use of captivating diction allows the reader to process the words in aw, as they give a special touch to Yams life.  Barshad describes Yams as "an ideal Internet user: a cultural polyglot who found beauty in its expansiveness."  The sentence has a rhythmic feel that the reader is automatically attracted to which draws their attention in.  Barshad captivates the audience to want to read about Yams, and then moves onto his life once the reader is paying attention.
Barshad speaks only once about Yams actual death; he focuses on the positives in his life and the features that made Rodriguez the man he was.  His overall positive outlook that he provides on Yams gives the reader a different viewpoint than of the drug-addict Harlem raised rapper that others knew him as.
By using captivating diction and focusing his article on only the positives in Yams life, Amos Barshad and the New York Times Magazine successfully honor a cultural icon that died too young.  Barshard also teaches a further lesson to his readers; looking at the bright side and appreciating the positives in life is much more uplifting than focusing on the down side.