My First College Rhetorical Analysis
Analysis
of Argument in Orenstein’s "I Tweet, Therefore I Am,"
When
you tweet, do you tweet for yourself?
Are you constantly wondering what would make a good tweet? In Peggy Orenstein’s
article “I Tweet, Therefore I Am,” she claims that people should tweet for themselves
and not for their followers because it makes everyone happier, that is,
assuming they know what twitter is and actually have followers. This article was featured in The New York
Times, which takes a somewhat liberal stance, and is also published online as
America’s most widely read newspaper. The intended audience for this article were
the readers of the Times, most of
which are businessmen and politicians between ages 30-35. However, it reaches a younger audience as
well. .
It was written on July 30th 2010 and printed on March 14th
2011. Through the use of tone shift, statistics, rhetorical questions, and
other tools author Peggy Orenstein creates an emotional appeal and establishes
logos to effectively convince these readers to tweet for themselves. A possible use of false authority makes her
appeal to ethos less effective, but it is balanced out with expert opinions and
identification with the readers.
The relevance of this article creates a
logical appeal. This article came out at
a time of Kairos. Twitter was created
March of 2006, but started to become really popular in 2010 with the “New
Twitter Experience” and “in February 2010, Twitter users were sending out 50
million tweets per day.” (Wikipedia) This
article came out in the summer of 2010, when the hype of twitter was just
getting steam, and it’s only gotten bigger.
It was the opportune moment to
suggest something to tweet about because people were still trying to figure out
what to say. The significance of Orenstein’s argument makes
it effective in convincing the reader to tweet for themselves. She is saying something that matters to the
people right at the time. She chose to
write about twitter for the New York Times because it was to the appropriate
people under the perfect circumstances.
She accomplishes logos by effectively using Kairos to convince the
reader to tweet for themselves.
Another way author Peggy Orenstein
establishes logos effectively to convince the reader to become one with twitter
is by using statistics. When
considering how many people are empathetic in their tweets, the article reads:
“in an analysis of 72 studies performed on nearly 14,000 college students
between 1979 and 2009, researchers at the Institute for Social Research at the
University of Michigan found a drop in that trait, with the sharpest decline
occurring since 2000.” (Orenstein) She uses this statistic to claim “Social
media may not have instigated that trend, but by encouraging self-promotion
over self-awareness, they may well be accelerating it.” (Orenstein) The numbers in the statistic
automatically strike an appeal to logos and the author steers the attention of
the reader to how much empathy has declined in people since 1979. She seeks to evoke empathy from the reader
now by drawing it out of them. It is
effective in that it pushes readers to be more self-aware and less
self-promoting as many politicians and business owners are. It is effective for the audience it is geared
towards.
Author Peggy Orenstein forms Ethos
effectively with point of view to gain the audience’s trust. Although she came late to twitter, she
learned to use it quickly to share not only her opinions on important issues, but
also situations from her everyday life as a mother. This suggests that she is well informed and
experienced. Her comment about “human
rights abuses against women in Guatemala” (Orenstein) also back-up her informed
nature. This helps her gain the trust of
women. The fact that she is a mother and
connected to social media also helps her to be seen as a “cool mom.” By identifying not only with the main
audience but also discourse community, Orenstein establishes ethos that
ultimately makes her argument to unite our lives with twitter more effective.
Although at first the author’s opinions
may seem like False Authority, she promotes ethical appeal with Authoritative
Voice by citing expert opinions, such as “the sociologist Erving Goffman” who
“famously argued that all of life is performance,” and “Sherry Turkle, a
professor at M.I.T.,” who “interviewed more than 400 children and parents about
their use of social media and cellphones.” (Orenstein) This was the readers know that
there are other credible sources who also have similar opinions and eliminates
the ethical fallacy of false authority.
This helps the audience trust the author more, making her appeal to
ethos effective in convincing them to tweet for themselves.
Her appeal to pathos is also
effective because it evokes emotions of nostalgia and peace in the audience
without being too overpowering. The
subtle hints of relaxation establishes the tone by her soft adjectives. The article is introduced on a “lazy Saturday
morning,” as Peggy and her daughter “lolled” on the lawn, “snacking… listening”
and “sprawled” out across the lawn in a “quintessential” summer moment. These words create a relaxed tone as the
reader imagines themselves in a care-free state. It makes the reader happy and thinking
“excitedly” about the perfect opportunity for a tweet. This is effective because Peggy is getting
the reader to focus on themselves in this moment and what they want. The positive tone convinces the reader that
they should tweet for themselves more often because it seems like a happy thing
to do.
Later in the article, Orenstein uses
tone shift to emphasize the point of not tweeting for others and this tool also
achieves pathos. It says “The risk of
the performance culture, of the packaged self, is that it erodes the very
relationships it purports to create, and alienates us from our own humanity.” (Orenstein) This illustrates her use of tone
shift from soft adjectives to harsh, discordant verbs such as “erode” and
“alienate.” It effectively sways the
reader away from becoming the “packaged self” and urges them to go back to the
relaxed tone of tweeting for themselves.
She uses cacophony in a way that effectively detracts the reader from
being disconnected with technology, and instead urges them to get
connected.
Orenstein utilizes figurative
language such as a metaphor for emotional charm. She alludes to Shakespeare when she uses the
comparison of “If all the world’s a stage, it has now become a reality TV
show: we mere players are not just aware
of the camera; we mug for it.” (Orenstein)
This comparison of twitter to reality TV and stage performances is aimed to
catch the attention of the reader and convince them not to act like they’re on
some show. Orenstein wants the audience
to act for themselves, and she refers to a historically famous writer to do it. This is effective in convincing most readers not
to be “mere players,” because after all, who doesn’t love Shakespere? She successfully strays the reader away from
tweeting for others by hinting that it is akin to a criminal act in which they
have to pose for the “mug” shot.
Another way she formulates pathos is by
using rhetorical questions. She asks
herself what she is feeling while she sits outside with her daughter; “Was it
my joy at being a mother? Nostalgia for my own childhood summers?” (Orenstein) Her
purpose is to cause the reader to question what they themselves are
feeling. It brings out emotion in the
reader and makes the article more memorable and the argument more
convincing. Orenstein wants the reader
to really consider how they feel next time they tweet.
Finally, Orenstein appeals to pathos by
using a full-circle ending. The article
starts off “in a recent lazy Saturday morning, my daughter and I lolled on a
blanket in our front yard… listening to a download of EB White,” and ends with
“next time I find myself lying on the
grass, stringing daisy chains and listening to EB White…” (Orenstein) This gives the article a sense of
closure. The purpose is to bring the
reader to the beginning and re-consider their opinion on the issue. Hopefully by this time they are convinced
that twitter is more for themselves than for their followers. The author wants to cause the reader to feel
satisfied with the article. Giving the
audience a sense of conclusion effectively urges them to tweet for themselves
next time.
In conclusion, Peggy Orenstein’s argument in
“I Tweet, Therefore I Am,” is ultimately effective in the purpose of convincing
the readers to tweet for themselves. It
is supportive of becoming “one” with twitter and just going with the flow
rather than worrying about what others will think of what you have to say, when
they’re probably just as worried as you are.
It’s like when women worry about what they wear. Most everyone else is too focused on
themselves to notice anyways, so if you’re going to dress up, do it for
yourself because it makes you feel good. The author assumes that if it makes
you feel good, it will probably make others feel good too. She effectively convinces us to tweet for
ourselves. It reaches the intended audience and strikes their emotional,
logical, and ethical appeals. Next time
the reader tweets, they’ll probably think more about what they want to say and
less about what their followers want to hear.
Works Cited
1. Orenstein, Peggy.
“I Tweet, Therefore I Am.” The New
York Times 30 July 2010: MM11. Print. 14 Mar. 2011. Copyright 2010 The New
York Times Company.
2. "The New York Times." Wikipedia. Wikimedia
Foundation, 23 Oct. 2013. Web. 23 Oct. 2013.
3. "Who
Is the New York Times Target Audience?" -
Ask.com. N.p., n.d. Web. 23 Oct. 2013.
Hi. If you have problems with approval essay to ielts here is nice writing service www.essayhelp24.com. Nice, fast and cheap service for essay writing. Don't waste time!
ReplyDeletenice article :)
ReplyDelete