Due in 48 hours | Education homework help

Assignmentweek3.docx

Assignment: Rhetorical Situation Analysis Report 1

Overview:

Completing this rhetorical situation analysis report will help you continue to understand the rhetorical situation for which a text was composed, identify the writer’s intended audience and rhetorical purpose, and consider how effective his or her strategies are for accomplishing that purpose. Completing this report will help you complete your Comparative Rhetorical Analysis Essay due in Week 6.

Text:

Tristan Harris on “Why AI is our ultimate test and greatest invitation”

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6kPHnl-RsVI

Note: Ted Talks have accessibility options that include a transcript of the talk as well as captions that can be turned on to play during the speaker’s presentation. The transcript may be helpful when referencing the talk while completing this assignment for quicker access.

Task:

Listen to the text assigned for this report and then answer the questions below. Write your responses in the form of short answers to each question. You will later use those responses to develop your Comparative Rhetorical Analysis Essay.

1. When and where did this text originally appear?

2. Is there a context for this text’s publication? What was going on in the world at the time? What event, situation, or argument is the writer responding to? (This one may take some basic research!)

3. How would you describe the discourse community in which this text is operating? Who is part of the discourse community, what values are important to them, what do members of this discourse community consider credible evidence? (Hint: Consider the layered audience here: the people physically present, the speaker’s awareness of a digital audience, and the wider community of viewers and thinkers who will engage with this talk afterward. How might these different groups shape what counts as “credible” or valuable?)

4. Who is the writer's intended audience, and what textual clues help you name that audience? Remember that the rhetorical audience is always more specific than anyone who reads the text.

5. What is the writer’s message, the key point(s) he or she is trying to convey? What is the writer trying to say?

6. What is the writer's rhetorical purpose? What does the writer want the audience to feel, know, believe, or do as a result of reading this text?

7. What rhetorical appeals does the writer use to accomplish his or her rhetorical purpose?

· Describe the writer's constructed ethos. How effectively does the writer construct himself or herself as credible, trustworthy, and knowledgeable?

· Describe the writer’s appeals to logos. What types of reasoning does the author present or use? To what values, beliefs, and assumptions does the writer appeal, and how likely is the intended audience to be persuaded by appeals to those values, beliefs, and assumptions?

· Describe the writer’s appeals to pathos. How effectively does the writer elicit an emotional response from the intended audience, and how effectively will those appeals to pathos help achieve the writer’s rhetorical purpose?

8. How appropriate do you think the text is for its rhetorical situation? How likely will the text achieve its rhetorical purpose?

Rubric

Rhetorical Situation Analysis Report 1 Rubric

Rhetorical Situation Analysis Report 1 Rubric
Criteria	Ratings	Pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeContext and Publication (Q1 & Q2)	10 to >8.0 ptsExcellentClearly identifies when and where the text was published with precise, accurate detail. Explains the broader context of the publication (historical, political, social, or cultural) with insight. 8 to >6.0 ptsProficientAccurately states when and where the text appeared. Offers some contextual background, though explanation may be more general or surface-level. 6 to >4.0 ptsDevelopingBasic or vague identification of the publication details or context is unclear, overly broad, or lacks accuracy. 4 to >0 ptsMissingImportant elements missing and/or vague.	10 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeDiscourse Community & Audience (Q3 & Q4)	10 to >8.0 ptsExcellentClearly and insightfully defines the discourse community, including its values, beliefs, and standards of evidence. Identifies a specific rhetorical audience with strong textual support and understanding of how the writer shapes the text for that group. 8 to >6.0 ptsProficientDescribes the discourse community with reasonable accuracy, though with less depth or nuance. Audience is identified and supported with some textual clues, but analysis may lack specificity. 6 to >4.0 ptsDevelopingGeneral or unclear description of the discourse community. Audience may be too broad or incorrectly identified, with little or no textual evidence to support the claim. 4 to >0 ptsMissingImportant elements missing and/or vague.	10 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeMessage & Purpose (Q5 & Q6)	10 to >8.0 ptsExcellentAccurately articulates the writer’s key message and analyzes the rhetorical purpose in clear, specific terms. Demonstrates a strong understanding of what the writer wants the audience to think, feel, or do as a result of the text. 8 to >6.0 ptsProficientIdentifies the central message and purpose with general accuracy. May be slightly vague or lack complete development, but the main ideas are clear and correct. 6 to >4.0 ptsDevelopingMessage and purpose are partially addressed but may be overly general, repetitive, or lack clarity. Little insight into how purpose connects with audience or context. 4 to >0 ptsMissingImportant elements missing and/or vague.	10 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeRhetorical Appeals (Q7, including 7a, 7b, 7c)	15 to >12.0 ptsExcellentThorough, well-organized analysis of ethos, logos, and pathos. Offers clear textual evidence and insightful evaluation of how each appeal contributes to the writer’s credibility, reasoning, and emotional impact. Demonstrates a deep understanding of rhetorical strategy. 12 to >9.0 ptsProficientAddresses all three appeals with reasonable explanation and examples. Analysis is mostly accurate and connected to rhetorical purpose. 9 to >6.0 ptsDevelopingAttempts to discuss the appeals but with minimal detail or weak textual support. May confuse the appeals or overlook how they relate to the audience and message. 6 to >0 ptsMissingImportant elements missing and/or vague.	15 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAppropriateness & Effectiveness	5 to >4.0 ptsExcellentOffers a clear and thoughtful judgment of how well the text fits its rhetorical situation and how likely it is to achieve its intended purpose. Uses specific reasoning to support the evaluation. 4 to >3.0 ptsProficientGives a plausible evaluation of the text’s effectiveness, though the explanation may be more general or lack specific support. 3 to >2.0 ptsDevelopingEvaluation is vague, overly brief, or not clearly connected to the rhetorical situation or purpose. 2 to >0 ptsMissingImportant elements missing and/or vague.	5 pts

Total Points: 50

Week3ExampleRhetoricalSituationAnalysisReport.docx

Rhetorical Situation Analysis Report

Example Rhetorical Situation Analysis Report (Week 3)

Text: Week 3 Nissan Commercial

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=StAPejF7KI8

Task: Listen to the text assigned for this report and then answer the questions below. Write your responses in the form of short answers to each question. You will later use those responses to develop your Comparative Rhetorical Analysis Essay.

1. When and where did this text originally appear? As an advertisement on broadcast television, during on-demand app viewing, and on social media apps such as YouTube.

2. Is there a context for this text’s publication? What was going on in the world at the time? What event, situation, or argument is the writer responding to? (This one may take some basic research!) Keeping in mind traditional gender roles and how those affect how advertisements target men and women differently, at times, would be important for understanding the rhetoric of this advertisement.

3. How would you describe the discourse community in which this text is operating? Who is part of the discourse community, what values are important to them, what do members of this discourse community consider credible evidence? The larger discourse community involves all audiences who view entertainment in any of the avenues mentioned in the answer to question 1. Within this group, there are viewers of different genders, races, ages, socio-economic backgrounds. Some in this group are already interested in purchasing in a car before viewing this commercial, and some do not need a vehicle or are not able to afford one. We may safely assume that the audiences who see this advertisement on broadcast television may be older because of the audience who still views appointment television. At the same time, we can assume a younger overall audience for app streaming. This Nissan advertisement also operates within the discourse community of contemporary media marketing, where brands aim to connect with culturally aware, emotionally engaged consumers. Credible evidence in this community comes in the form of emotional resonance, cultural alignment, and the effective use of recognizable public figures to endorse lifestyle ideals and not just products.

4. Who is the writer's intended audience, and what textual clues help you name that audience? Remember that the rhetorical audience is always more specific than anyone who reads the text . The ad’s primary audience is women, particularly those who may feel disconnected from traditional car marketing, which often skews male and technical. By using Brie Larson as the central figure and narrator, known for playing empowered female characters, the intended audience can see themselves reflected in the celebrity who acts as a “placeholder” for our own desires. Another clue about the intended audience is the language used in the ad that appeals to emotion and freedom (“driving used to be an act of freedom”). The visuals of the advertisement focus on aesthetics and color, which are both culturally coded appeals that appeal more often than not to female consumers.

5. What is the writer’s message, the key point(s) he or she is trying to convey? What is the writer trying to say? The writer’s message is that driving a Nissan is not just about transportation. It is about reclaiming a sense of excitement, empowerment, and individuality, particularly for women. The ad reframes driving as something emotional and liberating, rather than mechanical or utilitarian. Through Brie Larson, Nissan communicates that women belong in the center of the driving experience, not on the sidelines of car culture.

6. What is the writer's rhetorical purpose? What does the writer want the audience to feel, know, believe, or do as a result of reading this text? The writer’s rhetorical purpose is to persuade the audience to feel emotionally connected to the idea of driving, see themselves reflected in the Nissan brand, and ultimately, to buy the car by buying into the lifestyle and emotions it represents.

7. What rhetorical appeals does the writer use to accomplish his or her rhetorical purpose?

a. Describe the writer's constructed ethos. How effectively does the writer construct himself or herself as credible, trustworthy, and knowledgeable? Brie Larson’s role in the commercial establishes credibility by drawing on her public image as a strong, independent figure, notably through her role as Captain Marvel. Her presence lends authority and trust to the message, encouraging viewers to see her as a reliable voice on the excitement of driving, even though she is not a car expert. By centering a female spokesperson, Nissan positions itself as a brand that values inclusion and speaks directly to women, a demographic often overlooked in traditional car ads. This modern, emotionally aware approach builds the brand’s ethos as warm and empowering, suggesting it understands its audience’s desires beyond just technical details. However, this strategy carries some risk. If the gendered messaging feels too stereotypical or forced, it may come across as inauthentic and reduce the ad’s overall effectiveness.

b. Describe the writer’s appeals to logos. What types of reasoning does the author present or use? To what values, beliefs, and assumptions does the writer appeal, and how likely is the intended audience to be persuaded by appeals to those values, beliefs, and assumptions? While the ad doesn’t include technical specifications or performance details, it uses implied logic to make its case. The underlying message is simple: if driving used to be fun, and Nissan can bring that feeling back, then buying a Nissan is the logical step for someone who wants to enjoy driving again. The emotional reasoning is framed in a way that feels intuitive and believable. The ad also uses contrast as a form of logic. It presents a binary choice: either continue driving a boring car that does not inspire or choose a vehicle that offers excitement and personal connection. This contrast encourages the viewer to associate Nissan with a more fulfilling lifestyle, rather than just another mode of transportation. The reasoning here depends on cultural logic more than hard facts. The idea is that people now seek products that reflect their identity, values, and emotional needs. For consumers who care about self-expression and meaning, the ad’s message makes sense, not because of stats, but because of how the car fits into who they want to be.

c. Describe the writer’s appeals to pathos. How effectively does the writer elicit an emotional response from the intended audience, and how effectively will those appeals to pathos help achieve the writer’s rhetorical purpose? The commercial strongly appeals to emotion, beginning with the nostalgic line, “Remember when driving was fun?” This immediately invites the viewer to reflect on a past sense of joy and freedom associated with being behind the wheel. It isn’t just about the car. It is about reclaiming a feeling that may have been lost in the routines of everyday life. The emotional tone deepens with the line, “cars were our sanctuaries and co-conspirators.” This personifies the car as a trusted companion, suggesting that driving once represented independence, safety, and personal space. For viewers, especially those who view driving as more than transportation, this creates a meaningful emotional link between the product and their own memories or desires. The visuals in the ad support these emotional appeals. Vibrant car colors, scenic drives, and energetic camera work evoke feelings of freedom and excitement. These images are designed to make the audience not just understand the message, but feel it—making the car seem like a gateway to something more fulfilling.

8. How appropriate do you think the text is for its rhetorical situation? How likely will the text achieve its rhetorical purpose?

The ad is largely appropriate for its rhetorical situation. It taps into current cultural conversations about inclusivity and gender representation. It acknowledges the emotional experience of driving, which is often overlooked in car ads. The ad is likely to achieve its purpose with its primary audience: women who are not traditionally addressed by car marketing. It offers a fresh tone in a genre often dominated by performance stats and male voices. However, its success depends on whether audiences perceive the ad as authentically inclusive or simply strategic gendered marketing. If the latter, it may weaken its persuasive power.

image.jpg