Rhetorical analysis account

Essay 2: Writing an Analysis

Points Breakdown: Outline=40; Peer Review=40; Peer Revision=40; Final Draft=140. Outline Due: Thursday, 6/9 (refer to “Guide to Formal Outlining” on BB for instructions). First Rough Draft Due: Monday, 6/13 (must contain all elements and reach at least 3 full pages). Second Rough Draft Due: Wednesday, 6/15 (must be complete and ready to be polished). Final Draft Due: Monday, 6/20 (submit entire Writing Process Portfolio).

Description:

Write an analysis of an academic text’s argument, with particular emphasis on rhetorical strategies and the voices featured in the text.

Prompt:

Tom Acitelli’s “Why Budweiser Is the Last Beer that Should Call Itself ‘America’” and Alexandra Petri’s “Budweiser Is America? Sounds about Right” both discuss Budweiser’s controversial marketing move to rename itself “America.” However, Acitelli’s and Petri’s arguments are constructed very differently, and each author reaches a different conclusion. In examining the contrasting articles, you will:

• Introduce both authors and articles, including each author’s purpose and overall argument. • Consider the rhetorical situation—the context surrounding the larger issue and the intended audience for each text. • Explain your project for the paper, using metadiscourse (you may also use this space to make an evaluative argument

about which author’s rhetorical moves are more effective and persuasive, though you may save this until the conclusion if that better suits the flow of your analysis).

• Analyze both authors’ arguments closely, identifying what you see as their most interesting and important claims. • Evaluate the effectiveness of each author’s overall argument, focusing specifically on their modes of persuasion

(ethos, pathos, logos). • Identify each author’s use of evidence. • Select at least one rhetorical strategy and at least one fallacy to discuss for each text. • Explore whether one author uses a type of evidence or a specific rhetorical strategy better than the other, or if a

particular type of evidence or rhetorical strategy is more appropriate to one audience than to another. • Analyze the ways in which each author seems to be responding to different values and assumptions their intended

audience is likely to hold. How effectively does each author seem to respond to or make use of those beliefs? • Evaluate the texts based on their similarities and differences, their strengths and weaknesses, their effectiveness and

ineffectiveness, and/or their ethical and unethical tactics. • Conclude your thoughts cohesively, tying up all loose ends. • Explore the significance of your analysis.

Remember, this essay is an evaluation of two texts, where you are looking at two pieces side by side. Notice how each author expresses and articulates his/her argument, paying attention to how they potentially differ and overlap.

Expectations:

• 4-6 pages (at least 4 full pages) • Printed and stapled • Double-spaced • Standard (1-inch) margins • 12 point, Times New Roman font • MLA Works Cited page • Use specific quotes and lines of evidence. When doing so, be sure to give credit where credit is due, following MLA

in-text citation formatting. Example: In her article, Pincock asserts, “_______” (par. 5).

Writing Help:

You will have the opportunity to attend a required tutoring session with Brooke to go over your rough draft. If you have any questions, you are welcome to send me an email or stop by my office during my designated hours. Furthermore, Purdue OWL is an excellent reference for MLA formatting and academic writing, and you may also make appointments at the SDSU Writing Center for additional assistance. RWS 280 Essay 2 Prompt