GasLand: Rhetorical Analysis

GasLand. Dir. Josh Fox. Perf. Josh Fox. New Video Group, 2010. DVD.
This documentary is an exploration into the harmful effects of hydraulic fracturing (fracking) in the United States. Josh Fox, a rural Pennsylvania resident, was appalled when looking in to the activities of various oil and gas companies all throughout the countries and decided to research the potential environmental disasters in Pennsylvania by traveling all around Colorado, Wyoming, Arkansas, Texas, and other states in which the dangers of fracking have appeared. He discovers many loopholes in government documents such as the Clean Water Act and Clean Air Act that companies have greatly exploited in the past 10 years.

Fox's structure of his documentary is by far the most effective strategy used in GasLand. He starts by describing his home in Pennsylvania, which is on land that oil and gas companies want for gas production. After Fox first becomes active on the issue of fracking, he moves to a wider lens, exploring the closest drilling sites to his home and interviewing residents with contaminated water. Next, he travels to the west, where fracking first began, examining the long-term effects of drilling through powerful interviews with residents and research into studies, statistics and documents. Later, he has (or tries to have) interviews with company representatives, local officials, and community leaders. Finally, Fox ends with a blatant call to action from the public to rise against the dangers of oil and gas companies' fracking by asking questions on the outcomes of potential fracking in his home state and community.

Also, the director established his credibility at the beginning of the film by introducing himself as a selfless citizen who wants to protect his community as well as everyone's homes from fracking through various methods. Many of the shots of the camera pointing through a window give the audience something to relate to, since almost everyone in the country has looked out of a window of a car rolling down the road before. In addition, the scenes that include Josh attempting to call oil companies and constantly being transferred further connect with the audience. Out of all, one powerful line in the film drew my attention specifically: when Josh was asking for an interview with a company executive, someone on the phone asked who the documentary would be for. When Josh answered "the general public," he made it seem like the companies were completely turned off, leading into one failed attempt at an interview after another.

TOW Reflection: Two Presidents, Bill Clinton Speech (re-write), Calvin Hobbes

    Over this long, challenging year, I have learned about my personal writing style, identified several points of improvement, and followed through improving many of them very well. I remember Mr. Yost saying some time during the year that the primary purpose of this course is to develop the real-life skills of advanced reading and writing, which has been the purpose of numerous in-class assignments, group projects, the AP exam, and, of course, these TOW analyses. Therefore, I would like to take some time to observe my beneficial development in these posts to track my progress that will forever contribute to my talents as a reader and writer.
    My three TOW assignments that I will be analyzing are each from a consecutive marking period: Two Presidents, Smoking and Scheming; Bill Clinton's Speech at Montco; and the Calvin and Hobbes cartoon, "You Need a Lobotomy." Each of these posts highlighted a spotlight of development, taught me something about my writing, and show improvement from earlier posts. Overall, the lesson that Smoking and Scheming taught me was to pick a topic that I want to write about, especially when you have the freedom to do so. This was the first time I used that freedom in these essays. Next, Bill Clinton's Speech at Montco was more of a traditional way of improving my writing in the middle of the year. My editor, Dave K, helped me mold arguments into my writing and introduced me to new ways of organizing my ideas and improving my writing. This is easily seen in my re-write, which is by far my most in-depth and advanced TOW of the year. Lastly, I dug deeper into my childhood by using these TOWs as a time trip with Calvin and Hobbes. This was my favorite TOW out of all to write because I had a personal connection with the topic, which made my argument stronger through extensive articulation of my memories into the TOW.
     With the help of these TOWs, I have undoubtedly mastered "putting myself" into the essay and making this evident to the reader, further establishing my credibility. Now I can read almost any piece of writing and somehow build a connection and analyze the piece. Even though I have made drastic strides in organizing my ideas in an effective way, I still find myself trying to fit them into a traditional manner. Therefore, the greatest aspect of my writing to work on in the future is to work the structure and organization of my argument to make it more effective and less "boring."
   

NY Times: The Idled Young Americans

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/05/sunday-review/the-idled-young-americans.html?ref=opinion

This article highlights the little discussed fact that over the past 10 years, the United States has become the highest unemployment rate for citizens between the ages of 25-34 among the top economic countries. It starts off with a meaningful cartoon depicting college students leaving their campus and going straight to the unemployment office. Next, it elaborates on to the discrepancy between the county's modest economic recovery -- even better than most European countries -- and our weak growth in jobs for young adults. However, the article does add that that statistic does include post-bachelor education and young adults caring for children. Nonetheless, they are still a significantly poor numbers. The article ends with a few suggestions toward this recovery, most of them involving government support in fields that seem "unprofitable" and not monetarily useful, and a word of optimism.

Strangely enough, the author's credibility is established immediately after the article itself, stating "David Leonhardt is the Washington bureau chief of The New York Times." Leonhardt's successful strategies to reach his ideas out to the audience include his use of statistic contrast and an objective view of the problem and solution. For example, two graphs on the side show how America has lost its lead in employment among young adults and forms a connection to what other countries have done on this issue. Also, Leonhardt offers suggestions for fixing this situation without bashing someone else's opinion as well as speculates how this problem arose in the first place.