English assignment

PART B: CONTEXT

1. What is the context of the issues? What do you know about the topic? What issues does the topic raise? Is there a larger debate, discussion, or controversy already going on? What seems to be at stake?

The primary context of the issues surrounds the aspect of concussions and the National Football League (NFL), especially how the name Chronic Traumatic Encephalopathy (CTE) came into being. CTE is a freshly discovered disease affecting footballers and other athletes with symptoms related to suicide. The disease has elicited a myriad of issues and debate, including the authenticity of the Webster research that leads to the first publishing of the disease. Just like stated by Dr. Bennet Omalu, the continuous discussion and disgrace of the discovery put the lives of many footballers and athletes at risk. Besides, rebuking the discovery translates to dehumanizing Webster and other athletes that have contributed to the research.

2. Who is the writer? What do you know about the writer’s background, credibility, knowledge of the topic, beliefs, and social allegiances?

The author of the article is Dr. Bennet Omalu, who is the current chief medical examiner in San Joaquin County in California. Besides, Dr. Omalu is a great associate clinical professor of pathology at the famed University of California. From the text, there are several things about the writer that can be drawn, including his credibility, beliefs, background, understanding of the topic, and social allegiances. First, it is evident that Dr. Omalu has an extensive and in-depth knowledge and experience in the medical field, especially pathology. This is demonstrated by his thorough understanding of the medical terms and mental illnesses like Alzheimer’s disease and dementia pugilistica. His credibility is unquestionable as well as social allegiance, a factor that is clarified by his devotion to saving lives. (Omalu, 2015)

3. What is the publication/source? What do you know about its intended readers, reputability, political slant, and the topics it covers?

The article’s publication source is the Cable News Network (CNN), an iconic American satellite and fundamental cable television channel. CNN is a primary branch of the Time Warner Company and broadcasts several news on a 24-hour basis, and this particular article falls into the category of political opinions and social commentaries. The publication is intended for readers in the medical profession, football line of business, as well as any other individual that in one way or the other faces the risk of CTE. For example, the article educates pathologists on ways to distinguish between Alzheimer’s disease, dementia pugilistica, and CTE. The report also serves as a lesson to experts who discover things in their line of duty; they can indeed provide a solution to present problems that have never been explored before.

4. How does the writer define to rhetorical situation and identify the call to write? What is the writer’s orientation toward the issues involved? What is at stake for the writer?

There is no doubt that Dr. Omalu uses several rhetorical analysis tools in this article to demonstrate the need to address the issue of CTE, especially its importance in reducing deaths among footballers. He also uses this platform to criticize his opponents, terming them as dehumanizing Webster and other athletes that played a critical role in the discovery of the illness. First, the author highlights his firsthand interaction with Webster’s case, highlighting his ignorance and confusion. He wittingly introduces the rhetorical situation surrounding the death of the former Pittsburgh Steelers center, prompting the need to search for a sound solution. Dr. Omalu believes that the disease depicts characters similar to other brain injuries but slide evidence indicate otherwise. He uses this disparity as the primary need for his study. In the final part of his edition, the author takes a stand arguing that his discovery is critical to addressing issues related to CTE. (Omalu 2015).

5. Who is the intended audience? Is the writer addressing one group of readers or more than one? Is the writer trying to bring an audience into being (to create a group/ audience)? What kind of relationship is the writer trying to establish with readers? What assumptions about readers does the writer seem to make?

The author directs this particular edition to several people. First, he intends to silence doubters and detractors who think that the issue of CTE and footballers is not worth mentioning. In particular, he laments detractors like NFL doctors who have in the past discredited his discovery. In particular, he quotes Will Smith’s statement in the movie “Conclusion” that says that “if you continue to deny my work, more people will die.” Besides, the writer seems to create a new set of audience, including medical practitioners, footballers, and athletes, as well as other ordinary citizens that need to understand the causes and symptoms of CTE. For example, the author seems to address medical practitioners by his continued mention of his professor and encounters. It is also important to understand that the writer is trying so hard to create a good relationship with the readers just judging by the proper language he uses to narrate his discovery. In fact, he makes several assumptions about the readers, including the belief that all readers are oblivious of the discovery.

6. How does the writer use language? What is the writer’s tone? What does the writer’s word choice Chow about his or her assumptions about readers? Does the writer use specialized terms or slang? Are there memorable figures of speech? Does the writer stereotype?

It is also important to understand that Dr. Omalu uses technical and professional language to demonstrate his deep understanding of the topic. In particular, he uses medical terms like an autopsy, schizophrenia, necrosis, and many others to show his credibility in conducting the research. Besides, he uses several other writing styles like narration actually to bring out his first meeting with Webster’s case. He as well manages to portray himself as a shocked and high figure throughout the paper, especially with the discovery. For example, he says, “I was flabbergasted when I opened his skull and saw a brain.’ He cannot hide his enthusiasm at the freshly discovered disease.

7. What is your evaluation of the rhetorical effectiveness? Does the writer accomplish his or her purposes? What constraints, if any, qualify the writing’s effectiveness

I believe that the rhetorical definition of the issue plays a useful role in addressing the writer’s concern, especially exploring the symptoms and impacts of the disease as well as silencing the detractors. In fact, it is clear that the critics like NFL doctors have served as a driving force for the success of the experiment because the researcher is motivated to prove them wrong by providing concrete academic evidence. In the end, the writer manages to come up with the CTE name for the strange mental illnesses. It is also important to understand that the gaps present, especially in labeling Webster’s brain disease, has been useful in the study.

Reference

Omalu, B. (2015, December 15). Concussions and NFL: How the name CTE came about. CNN Opinion.