Week 4 Discussion Template: Find A Two-Minute Clip On Any De

Week 4 Discussion Templatefind A Two Minute Clip On Any Debate Aired O

Find a two-minute clip on any debate aired on the news in the last year. Provide a link to the clip and address the following: Provide a link here. What is the context of the argument being made? Answer the prompt here. Identify at least two or three rhetorical devices used during this debate and explain their effect on the audience.

Do you think the speakers use these intentionally? If so, for what purpose? If not, explain your reasoning. Answer the prompt here. As you can see, this template is a bit different from the APA formatting required for essays (no title page, header, or separate reference page, and I do not require indentations of the first line of paragraphs or use hanging indent in the references because indentation is challenging to manage in Canvas posts.

I also allow the Q&A format because it makes it easier for you to ensure you answered all questions thoroughly. This template is designed explicitly for Week 1. Answer each question fully each week. Be sure to cite your sources. The correct in-text citations for the resources I have provided below are (Moore & Parker, 2020) or (Moore & Parker, 2020, p. #) if you are quoting for the textbook.

For class videos, the correct in-text citations are (Burrell, n.d.) if you are not quoting. You must include a timestamp in the citation when quoting the video (Burrell, n.d., 1:21) if the quote starts one minute and 21 seconds into the video. Not all course videos provide a timeline, and you must time it yourself if a timeline is not provided. I suggest always paraphrasing rather than quoting. If you use more than one video from the class, you must distinguish between them in your paper.

Put the sources in alphabetical order (as I have here) and use n.d.-a, n.d.-b, etc., in citations. If you only use one video, only use n.d. (not n.d.-a, n.d.-b, etc.). Scroll down to the reference page. References Moore, B.N., & Parker, R. (2020). Critical thinking (13th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education. Burrell, T. (n.d.-a). Introduction to critical thinking, logic, knowledge, belief, truth [Video]. Canvas@WCU. Burrell, T. (n.d.-b). Week 1: Critical Thinking, Logic, Knowledge, Belief, Truth Presentation [Video]. Canvas@WCU. You need at least two references for each discussion. While I encourage using credible outside references (journal articles from the library or government websites, news articles from solid news outlets, etc.), the above references will meet your requirements. I have provided the proper formatting for the textbook and video references.

If you use more than one video from the class, you must distinguish between them in your paper. Put the sources in alphabetical order (as I have here) and use n.d.-a, n.d.-b, etc., in citations. If you only use one video, only use n.d. (not n.d.-a, n.d.-b, etc.). APA 7 is different from APA 6. Here is a website covering some key differences:.

Regarding references, these are the most common mistakes I see: · You made errors in capitalization of titles in your references. In APA, standard capitalization rules are followed everywhere but in titles of articles in references. In those, only capitalize the first word of the title, the first word after a colon in the title, and proper nouns. You also made errors in italicization. Italicize the article's title (unless it is followed by journal information -- then italicize the journal title and volume). · City/state of publisher not listed in references in APA 7. · Replace "Retrieved...from" with the website title in APA 7. · When you reference an article from a website and have no author, the reference follows this order: Article title in italics. (date). Website Title. Website URL. Use the article title (not the website title) in your citations.

Be sure to delete all this and other informational material from the template before you turn it in. Feel free to contact me with any questions you have.

Paper For Above instruction

For this assignment, I selected a recent news debate clip regarding the ongoing discussions about climate change policies in the United States. The clip, lasting approximately two minutes, features two prominent politicians debating the effectiveness of federal climate legislation. The context of the argument centers around the urgency of implementing comprehensive policies to combat climate change and the economic implications of such policies. One speaker argues that immediate legislative action is necessary to prevent irreversible damage to the environment, while the other emphasizes the importance of economic stability and cautions against rushed policies that might hinder economic growth.

The chosen debate clip can be viewed here: [Insert Link]. The debate’s tone is heated but informative, reflecting the seriousness with which both parties view the issue. During the debate, several rhetorical devices are employed to persuade the audience and strengthen their arguments.

Rhetorical Devices and Their Effects

First, both speakers make extensive use of repetition, particularly when emphasizing key messages. For example, the phrase "act now" is repeated by the pro-environment speaker to stress urgency. This device reinforces the importance of immediate action, making the audience more likely to feel the pressure to support legislation. The repetition serves to embed the idea in viewers' minds, fostering a sense of urgency and moral responsibility (Moore & Parker, 2020).

Second, emotional appeals, especially to fear and patriotism, are evident in the debate. The opposition invokes fear of economic decline if policies are enacted hastily, warning that jobs might be lost and the economy destabilized. Conversely, the pro-policy speaker appeals to patriotism, framing climate action as a moral duty to protect the nation’s future. These emotional appeals are designed to sway viewers’ opinions by appealing to their core values and fears, thus strengthening the persuasive impact of the argument (Burrell, n.d.-a).

It is evident that these rhetorical devices are utilized intentionally by the speakers. The speakers are aware of the power of repetition and emotional appeals in shaping public opinion and are likely employing these devices deliberately to persuade viewers, reinforce their messages, and create an emotional connection with the audience (Moore & Parker, 2020). Their goal is to mobilize public support and influence policy outcomes by reinforcing their arguments with rhetorical strategies.

Conclusion

The debate scene illustrates how rhetorical devices such as repetition and emotional appeals significantly influence public perception. Both speakers use these techniques intentionally to strengthen their positions and persuade their audience effectively. The strategic use of these devices underscores the importance of understanding rhetoric in contemporary political discourse, especially as it relates to shaping policy and public opinion on critical issues like climate change.

References

• Burrell, T. (n.d.-a). Introduction to critical thinking, logic, knowledge, belief, truth [Video]. Canvas@WCU.
• Moore, B.N., & Parker, R. (2020). Critical thinking (13th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education.