I have just selected the piece of media that I will be writing about in my rhetorical analysis paper and I believe that writing five pages on this advertisement will be somewhat easy given its message. This advertisement was first published September 9th, 2009 by the company called the World Wildlife Fund (WWF). It is a black and white image of New York City, Twin Towers standing, with over thirty airplanes headed for every building. There are actually too many airplanes to count and every one of them is flying straight down toward, not only the Twin Towers, but all the buildings around them as well. WWF is attempting to make a comparison between the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami with terrorist attacks of 9/11 by having the caption state “The tsunami killed 100 times more people than 9/11.” I think this is an insensitive comparison between to two events as one was a natural disaster and the other was a deliberate terrorist attack from another country on American soil. I also feel this is insensitive to the families who suffered losses from the attacks of 9/11. They shouldn’t be so brutally reminded of the tragedy only eight years later while innocently reading a magazine.
The strongest rhetorical appeals in this piece of media would be pathos because it brings forth so many emotions not only for survivors and witnesses of 9/11 but also the survivors and witnesses of the 2004 tsunami. In a way, this ad draws out the emotions felt on the day of each tragedy which is overpoweringly a pathos appeal. It also incorporates logos when it gives the statistic that the tsunami killed 100 times more people than 9/11. This is a logical fact making this a logos appeal. These rhetorical methods are not very effective for the message WWF is trying to make due to the extreme measures the ad was taken too. The words underneath the numerical statement are “the planet is brutally powerful. Respect it. Preserve it" making the intended message to care for the planet and our environment. Unfortunately this ad backfired and ended up doing more harm to WWF, than good to our planet. Although the rhetorical methods used are not good for WWF’s intended message, they are good for generating a response out of readers through the use of tragic events and horrible losses.
I don’t think I will have too many roadblocks when writing this paper because I feel very strongly about this ad and the message it is conveying. My uncle has worked in New York City, in a building next to the Twin Towers, since the mid-90s and was unfortunately there on the day the towers were hit. Thankfully he caught a ferry and made in out of the city in time but I know a number of his friends weren’t as lucky. If this ad disturbed me, than I am sure if I were to show him, it would hurt him as well. Due to the fact that I have a personal story to help motivate me while writing my paper I don’t think I will run into any roadblocks.
That is a really interesting text to analyze. I wanted to do something like that, but I have really strong feelings about 9/11 (I was living in New York at the time) and I'm not sure if that's a good thing for this assignment.
ReplyDeleteHoly cow, what a great choice. I can't wait to see the ad. It is such an interesting (and hurtful) rhetorical choice to compare to tragedies like 9/11 and the 2004 tsunami. The point is that Americans often don't look far beyond their own soil... but is this really the way to get them to thoughtfully consider the rest of the world? I don't really think so.
ReplyDeleteI definitely think that even though it has been 9 years since the attack, it's very insensitive to bring it back up and comparing it to a natural disaster. Though the tsunami is terrible, it's also a terrible way to bright the topic to light.
ReplyDelete