TOW #28: Lyndon B. Johnson's "Daisy Attack" Advertisement

Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dDTBnsqxZ3k

America in the 1960s was plagued with a fear of communism and the fear of a possible nuclear war with the Soviet Union. Politics during this time played heavily off of this fear, and during the presidential election of 1964, Lyndon B. Johnson used this fear to win the election with an anti-nuclear bomb advertising campaign. In his famous “Daisy Attack” advertisement, the Johnson campaign uses serene imagery juxtaposed with violent imagery and an extreme appeal to sympathy in order to convince the American people that he is the right choice for the election.

In its “Daisy Attack” advertisement, the Johnson juxtaposes a calm scene and quickly snaps to a scene filled with violence in order to instill fear into the audience. The advertisement begins with a young girl counting the petals of a flower, counting up from one. This pulls watchers in, as they watch and are filled with emotions. Then, the girl looks up at the sky in response to someone counting down from 10. When the timer reaches zero, a nuclear bomb goes off, implying the girl was enveloped in the explosion. This dramatic shift instills fear into the audience as they watch a little girl instantly become a victim of nuclear war. The purpose drawing this reaction from the audience was to make them feel like Johnson would protect them from an event like this from ever happening. Watchers sympathize with the girl, who was just killed, which was supposed to make people obligated to vote for Johnson.

However, this advertisement campaign blew up in Johnson’s face, as he instilled too much fear into his audience. Viewers became terrified, as it made nuclear war seem so close to happening. Because of this unsuccessful, and even countactive, approach to get people to want to vote for Johnson, this advertisement was taken down within days. Despite all this, other advertisement in Johnson’s advertising campaign saved him by only instilling mild amounts of fear, helping to win him the presidential election of 1964.

(http://www.chicagonow.com/politics-now/files/2016/07/daisy.jpg)

TOW #27: "Click: What Millions of People Are Doing Online and Why It Matters," by Bill Tancer

In Click: What Millions of People Are Doing Online and Why It Matters, Bill Tancer describes the psychology behind what people are clicking on when browsing the internet. He then applies this psychology to how people think, allowing us to understand how we tick. Throughout the text, he uses a scholarly tone, graphs, and hypophora in order to uncover a deeper truth about the psychology about why we do certain activities while online.

Tancer maintains a scholarly tone throughout the text in order to establish ethos on the subject and to be more convincing to his readers. For example, he says, “An interesting corollary to this concept of measuring political thought processes through clickstream data is the use of this same data to understand political bias in traditional news coverage” (46). Using words, such as “corollary,” and technical jargon, such as “clickstream,” Tancer is able to show that he is both a credible source of information and educated in the topic. This allows him to convey his message to readers in a more convincing way that makes his readers question his credibility less.

Tancer also uses graphs to support his ideas and provide background statistics that help readers come to the same deductions that Tancer does. Providing graphs also gives visuals for people who are more visual learners, broadening his audience. Since these graphs are based off of real statistics from credible third-party sources, he is able to establish a stronger sense of ethos.

At the beginning of most chapters, Tancer uses hypophora to introduce his ideas and transition from previous chapters to the current chapter. In Chapter 10, a chapter that talks about finding early adopters to a specific site, Tancer asks, “Do you ever wonder how innovation spreads from an idea to mass adoption?” (171). By asking this broad question at the beginning of the chapter, he can spend the rest of the chapter delving into this topic and answering the question. This structure provides a great way for Tancer to get his readers to question the same things he does, and then transition into the idea at hand.

Throughout Click, Tancer uses his rhetoric in order to discover the true psychology behind what people do online and why. He is able to successfully get his ideas across to his readers as writes in a way that gets readers excited about the topic as well.

TOW #26: "What is the Monkeysphere?" by David Wong

In his article “What is the Monkeysphere?”, David Wong writes about the Monkeysphere theory, discussing that there’s a certain limit to the number of people that we can conceptualize as people and anyone outside this circle of people are seen more things. This explains why the death of a friend or family member can be traumatizing, while the massacring of a thousand people on the other side of the world is only a mere statistic. Wong uses hypophora and a blunt, colloquial tone in order to explain this Monkeysphere theory and to convey how we can be more mindful people.

Wong structures his article in a strict fashion, where he uses hypophora to drive the article forwards and transition between different concepts. More specifically, the questions that he asks are questions that he predicts we may have in our heads. For example, when transitioning between explaining what the Monkeysphere is and telling readers why it is important, he asks, “So what exactly are we supposed to do about all this?” Since he spent most of his time explaining what this theory entails, he knows that the readers might be wondering why he is talking about it. This hypophora allows him to transition into talking about how we can apply this concept to life and the real world.

Along with using this strict structure of writing, he utilizes a blunt, colloquial tone to better connect with readers and to give his straightforward, no-fluff thoughts. When talking about why people should understand this idea of the Monkeysphere, he gives his three-point application, with the first point being, “First, TOTAL MORON. That is, accept the fact THAT YOU ARE ONE. We all are.” He is telling his readers that they are “morons” because most people tend to be very self-centered and not care about other people who are outside of their Monkeysphere. With this tone, he is also edgy and borderline offensive, which makes his argumentations more real and to the point.

Despite having an overall casual feel, this article was meant to expose a deeper truth within all of us: that we do not care about people we do not know. Wong explains it is impossible to care about everyone because this would require us to be deeply invested in the interests of 7 million people. But, what Wong does try to get across is that we should live our lives in mindfulness, and be more aware that even the people we do not closely associate with are people and deserve the same respect that people we are close with do.

(https://animalfeasance.files.wordpress.com/2011/08/chimps.jpg)

IRD Intro Post (MP4)

For the Fourth Marking Period, I will be reading "Click: What Millions of People Are Doing Online and Why It Matters," a book that describes the psychology behind what people are clicking on when browsing the internet. It then applies this psychology to how people think, allowing us to understand how we tick. This is very interesting to my interests in business as it provides deep insite into why the mind does what it does.

http://june.typepad.com/.a/6a00e54ed1baa988330105356ae79b970c-pi

TOW #25: "AP Classes Are a Scam" by John Tierny

In “AP Classes Are a Scam,” journalist John Tierny writes about how College Board is scamming students by offering so-called college-level classes (when they are really not) and making large profits off of millions of high schoolers. He uses a condescending tone, listing, and plebeian diction in order to urge parents and students to be wary of the tricks College Board plays to make money.

Throughout the article, Tierny uses a condescending tone in order to show his disapproval of College Board. He opens up describing Advanced Placement courses as “one of the great frauds currently perpetrated on American high-school students.” He constantly attacks College Board for its fraudulence and effectively uses his tone as a way to convey his emotions. This impacts readers by also giving them these same ill feelings that Tierny has.

After giving his position on College Board, he supports his argument by listing off the main reasons as to why he believes Advanced Placement is a scam. He says things such as the fact that many of these courses are not nearly college level to the fact that “the AP classroom is where intellectual curiosity goes to die.” By listing many of the weaknesses and flaws of Advanced Placement courses, Tierny is able to allow readers to inductively come to the same conclusions that he has about these courses.

Given that his audience is parents and students, Tierny also uses plebeian diction in order to connect better with his readers. For example, he says, “My beef with AP courses isn't novel.” “My beef” is more of a colloquial and slang phrase that many young people would use in America. By doing this, Tierny is able to connect with his audience of both students and parents and convey his message in a more captivating way.

Despite all this, there is one major flaw in Tierny’s article. This is the fact that he spends all his time speaking invectively towards College Board and fails to include counterargument refutation. By leaving out a refutation of the positive aspects of Advanced Placement, Tierny fails to convince those who believe that the positives of Advanced Placement outweigh the negatives. Despite this, he uses strong rhetoric, allowing more people to be wary when it comes to Advanced Placement courses.

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e8/College_board_logo.svg/1280px-College_board_logo.svg.png)

TOW #24: IRB- "Think Like a Freak," by Steven D. Levitt and Stephen J. Dubner

In Think Like a Freak, Steven D. Levitt and Stephen J. Dubner give many key points important to be successful in life by discussing how to rework the way people think. They believe that the best way of thinking is both rational and creative, and that the most successful people think this way. By using expert testimony and deductive reasoning, these authors are able to push their readers to truly “think like a freak.”

Throughout the book, Levitt and Dubner use expert testimony in order to give concrete evidence to why their claims are correct. When talking about how people who fail usually are too confident in their future, they quote Niels Bohr, a scientist who became successful in his field with his contributions to understanding atomic structure and quantum theory, who said, “Prediction...is very difficult, especially if it’s about the future.” This supports their point that we cannot be completely certain in where we turn out as it might blind us from the present problems at hand. Levitt and Dubner are trying to push readers from being so infatuated with having a successful future and to be more involved in solving present problems. By using testimony from various relevant professionals, they are able to convince their readers better, further building up their ethos.

Levitt and Dubner also use deductive reasoning to explain what people are generally compelled to do and then to tell their readers to not conform to this status quo. For example, when talking about the importance for metacognition, they say, “The barrier to thinking like a Freak is that most people are too busy to rethink the way they think– or even spend thinking at all.” Levitt and Dubner start off by giving the major premise that most people are lazy when it comes about analyzing the effectiveness of their thinking and establishing that this leads to failure. With this reasoning, they conclude that in order to be successful, people need to be more analytical about how they think and to change how they think if needed. By using deductive reason, the authors are able to logically argue their points and tell people not to conform to what the majority does.

Overall, by using expert testimony and deductive reasoning, Levitt and Dubner are able to successfully argue that rational and creative thinking is the best way of thinking. 

(http://thinkingorganized.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/gear-head-blue.png)

TOW #23: "The Progressive Case for Immigration" by The Economist

In “The Progressive Case for Immigration,” the Economist writes about how immigration can actually be economically beneficial than what many believe it to be harmful. It uses counterargument refutation, statistics, and an appeal to logos in order to convince readers to be more open to opening up their country’s borders to migrant workers.

This article is structured by bringing up a claim that an anti-immigration advocate would make and then refuting it with statistics. The Economist says, “On what grounds do immigration opponents justify obstructing this happy outcome? Some suppose it would be better for poor countries to become rich themselves.” And then it goes on explaining how this argument is invalid with facts from economists and statisticians. By structuring the article like this, readers who are against immigration can be more easily convinced about the benefits of immigration.

By using statistics, this establishes the author’s ethos. It says, “A Mexican worker can expect to earn more than 2.5 times her Mexican wage, in PPP-adjusted dollars, in America. The multiple for Haitian workers is over 10; for Yemenis it is 15.” This statistic supports the argument that the quality of life can greatly increase when foreign workers come to first world countries to work, which can help to boost the economy. By using statistics, the author becomes more credible and can easier believe the argument that the author is making.

In general, the author of this article uses a strong appeal to logos in order to logically argue his or her point. By doing this, he or she can convince the audience, who would want to know the facts on this argument, that opening up a country immigration is beneficial.

Overall, the author uses counterargument refutation, statistics, and an appeal to logos in order to convince readers to be more open to opening up their country’s borders to migrant workers. With ongoing issue on immigration today, the author could have opened up more on the cultural baggage of immigration and terrorism as this is more relevant to today.

https://imprimis.hillsdale.edu/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/Immigration.png