Paper 1 looks at an article in context. Specifically, it looks at how different


Paper 1 looks at an article in context. Specifically, it looks at how different audiences can change the perceived meaning and effectiveness of a text. You will read “The Art of Branding a Condition” (https://sdsuwriting.pbworks.com/f/Parry+art+of+branding+a+condition.pdf), and you will analyze it’s argument and effectiveness when looking at two different audiences.
So the intended audience of “The Art of Branding a Condition” is Pharmaceutical companies. The Main Claim is that they should use condition branding. The Reasoning is that condition branding will make them money. The Warrant is that they want to make money. His evidence is that many companies in the past have made money off of condition branding (Precedent), and so you should too (Rule of Justice). Overall, I’d say it’s a logically effective argument.
However, what if the intended audience of this paper was pharmaceutical consumers (regular people who use prescription or over-the-counter medicine), and the Main Claim was “Condition branding is good for you.” What would the reasoning be? What would the Warrant be? More importantly, would this be an effective argument to them? Would the author, through his Rhetorical Strategies, convince the reader to accept that condition branding is good for him or her? Would the evidence provided prove the Main Claim? Would the author’s Ethos be strong with them? Would there be effective Pathos-based Rhetorical Strategies to win them over? Basically, analyze his argument’s effectiveness as though this were written to regular people like you or me.
This paper requires:
4-6 pages
MLA format


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.