Tuesday, August 4, 2015

My Rhetorical Action Plan

Responses to numbered and bulleted prompts in WPL p. 412-413

  1. Audience
  • Knowledge: It seems there a lot of misinformation about nuclear waste and nuclear waste in general. Mass media paints it in a very negative light. Most people get their information by general public opinion since it is not a widely explored topic.
  • Values: My audience values safety and enivonmental well-being, which is what drives their position, no matter what side they are on.
  • Standards of Argument: I think scientific research from reputable sources will be necessary. It is likely that this information will need to be translated as it is likely to contain some technical information and verbiage.
  • Visual Elements: I think pictures are a good way to illustrate the extent of the repository.
  • Purpose: My purpose is to convince my audience that we need to continue the operation of the WIPP facility.
2. Genre
  • Function: The function of my genre (animated presentation) is to engage the audience and provide pertinent information in an easily accessible format.
  • Setting/How could it be used: My presentation could be used to inform large audiences such as town hall meetings and other public forums about the issue.
  • How might I use rhetorical appeals: Logos will be used in showing people that we have waste that needs to be stored. Ethos by referencing reliable information from the Department of Energy and reputable scientists. Pathos by showing the economic/community benefits that the repository brings.
  • Visual Elements: The presentation will be visually stimulating with any data expressed on plots/graphs. This is to help the audience understand the information and keep them engaged.
  • Style: The style of this presentation is conversational. I want the information to be presented in an understandable fashion with room for discussion and elaboration on the key points.
3.Responses/Actions
  • Positive Support
    • People recognize the necessity of the repository and trust the responsible parties to conduct the research and implementation safely.
  • Negative Rebuttals
    • People do not have trust in the responsible parties after the recent accidents. This rebuttal is the most important, but I think after people learn about the specifics of the accident, this argument can be discredited.
  • Chain of Action
    • The goal is that people will take community action by voting and informing others about the subject if they support my position.

No comments:

Post a Comment