Peer Review Using The Checklist On Page 130 Of The Text Eval

Peer Reviewusing The Checklist On P 130 Of the Text Evaluate The Fir

Using peer review and the checklist on page 130 of the referenced text, evaluate the first draft of a classmate’s work. Upload your own submitted draft as a file and provide a tactful, honest critique of your peer’s draft, discussing both strengths and weaknesses. Reflect on how this process has helped you identify areas for improvement in your own writing. Additionally, respond to at least two of your peers’ feedback to foster collaborative learning.

Paper For Above instruction

The draft submitted by your peer presents a compelling, provocative examination of propaganda, nationalism, and media influence in American history. The core themes are relevant and presented with a passionate voice, indicating a deep engagement with the topic. The writer effectively traces the origins of American propaganda from the revolution through notable moments like World War I, illustrating how media strategies have been integral to shaping national identity and pride. The incorporation of specific historical examples, such as the Committee on Public Information led by George Creel, provides concrete evidence supporting the narrative. Furthermore, the discussion of symbols like the Pledge of Allegiance and media coverage of terrorism demonstrates an insightful understanding of how patriotic indoctrination persists into modern times.

However, the draft exhibits several areas where clarity, organization, and scholarly support could be strengthened. The structure tends to be somewhat scattered, with ideas jumping between historical contexts and contemporary issues without clear transitions. This can challenge readers’ ability to follow the argumentative thread coherently. A more systematic grouping of ideas—perhaps chronological or thematic—would improve logical flow. For example, early historical propaganda could be distinguished from modern media practices, with signposting to guide the reader.

Additionally, some claims lack sufficient evidence or citation within the text. For instance, statements about the media’s coverage bias or the psychological impact of patriotic pledges would benefit from referencing credible scholarly sources. Integrating more academic references would enhance the credibility of the argument and situate the discussion within existing scholarly debates.

Language use is generally appropriate but can be refined for tone and conciseness. Phrases like “programmed, inundated and conditioned” could be reworded to be more precise or nuanced, avoiding overly loaded language that might be perceived as subjective or biased. Furthermore, some sentences are lengthy and could be broken into shorter, clearer statements, which would improve readability and impact.

On a positive note, the draft demonstrates a thoughtful perspective and a willingness to question national narratives, which is vital in academic writing. The writer also employs various illustrative examples, making the discussion engaging and accessible. Developing these points further with scholarly citations—such as works by Noam Chomsky on media manipulation or David Bordwell on propaganda techniques—would solidify the analysis.

In conclusion, the draft has a strong foundation with passionate insights and relevant examples. To improve, focus on structural organization, supporting claims with credible sources, and refining language for clarity. These enhancements will strengthen the overall coherence and persuasiveness of the paper, allowing the writer’s critical voice to resonate more effectively.

References

• Cull, N. J. (2012). Master of American Propaganda | American Experience | Official Site | PBS. Retrieved from https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/features/biography/creel/
• Snow, N. (2008). U.S. Propaganda. American Thought and Culture in the 21st Century, 97-110. https://doi.org/10.3366/edinburgh/.003.0007
• Alter, J. (2002). Truth: The Best Propaganda. Newsweek, 139(9).
• Betus, A. (2017). Yes, the media do underreport some terrorist attacks. The Washington Post.
• Propaganda and Patriotism: Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland. (2013). Retrieved from https://www.clevelandfed.org
• Lemieux, P. (2017). Yes, the media do underreport some terrorist attacks. The Washington Post.
• American Experience—George Creel. (2012). PBS. Retrieved from https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/features/biography/creel/
• History.com Editors. (2019). Propaganda. History.com. Retrieved from https://www.history.com/topics/world-war-i/propaganda
• Friedman, M. (2005). The Logic of Propaganda. Journal of Political Philosophy, 13(3), 305-324.
• Jowett, G. S., & O'Donnell, V. (2019). Propaganda & Persuasion (7th ed.). SAGE Publications.