Rhetorical Analysis

 This blog post is a rhetorical analysis about the San Bernardino Shooting Crisis that took place at the end of last year.

Author

• This story resonates with me personally. My junior year, I was a victim of gun violence. A man broke down the door to my house and held guns at my head and robbed me. Even with this tragedy, however, it is my duty to persuade Americans to NOT publicly encourage the FBI backdoor, which allows government officials to break into the inner thoughts of every Americans. Every major political station and news website/station has covered this case, as it fits the sensationalist headline (gun violence, government interference) that news stations thrive on. With love and support from my family and friends, I can confidently say that, in the rare case that tragedy strikes, it's not inability to access the communications on the criminal's end, and that we shall NOT punish the average person for the doings of a few.

• For my articles, I need to discern the pro's and the con's of the backdoor, and, more importantly, indicate that the con's of the backdoor will outweigh the cons. My argument is to tear apart a bad idea, relating my past experience to the facts and statistics in order to send the message that publicly allowing governments to see what we do is a complete violation of privacy and human decency rights.

Audience

• This article concerns not only everybody who enjoys the luxury of the internet, but anyone who buys corporate electronic products. It also extends to those who enjoy their privacy while using said services. That means that EVERY American should be invested in this cause.
• Opening up the case with my personal anecdote will get the reader to listen - everybody loves a sob story. Then, we slam the door shut with logic, and an ethical spin on our altruistic duties to the average American.
• I identify as Libertarian/Independent leaning towards the conservative side, so this is right up my alley. That means that I will need my most liberal friend to counter all of my points in order to attack my weak points, therefore, allowing me to round out my argument.

 Purpose

• It's extremely clear what I'm trying to say. Our privacy is more important than we think. We know that the FBI already oversteps our personal lives, and if we publicly allow them to walk all over Apple into giving them our conversations, then what will stop them from reaching into the pool of data from other corporations? Nothing.

• I think many of the people talking about this issue are only concerned about the political aspects of the issue and not the people of Flint, Michigan. I think they need to focus less on the controversy and more on the people who are beingb affected by the tragedy. There could be more testimony from them rather than the politicians involved. We need to know why they think this is happening, and what they think could be done to fix the overlying issues.  After all, it is their livelihoods and children that are being affected, not the politicians in Washington.

Genre

A video essay will allow me to appeal quickly and most effectively. I can visually portray these tragedies, and the implications the backdoor has.

• I want to target people of all ages. The youth need to understand what is happening just as much as their grandparents do. This will be a great experience for me to learn how to perform a video essay. I have made videos before, so this should not be too horrible. However, the biggest complication will be ensuring that the video is not too sappy. The facts need to hit just as hard as the hook that brought the viewer here. The most important thing for me will probably be the music. As a musician, I know that you can imprint in a viewer's head a certain emotion, no matter what is being said. Take this neutral statement:

"It was the last time he would ever see that man."

Sad music will project feelings of sadness, regardless of context.

Happy music will project feelings of closure, fullness.

 When

• We need to persuade people to act now. Even sending a tweet out right now in protest of the FBI backdoor will allow people to stop and take a stance. The neutral audience is the dangerous audience, not the people who have an opinion. We also need to examine what happened before when the government overstepped the privacy of the people.
• I want to discuss extreme examples where communication is moderated, like North Korea, relate it to past moderation, like Britain, and discuss implications it would project to the future children if our liberty/privacy was squandered.People need to understand NOW that it would do much more hurt than help.