Monday, February 27, 2012

Oh the Issues of the World... Which one to pick to write on?

Well, the Issues Paper is here. And we have to come up with 3 Issues.... but I'm pretty set on writing on this topic. I was part of the fight to preserve traditional marriage in California during the Proposition 8 campaign, investing time, money, and effort into the campaign. My dad was a Judge very involved in the legal system and offered much legal advice. I know a lot about this topic and can't wait to find out more about it and show everyone that this issue that started in California is not just a Californian issue, but a national issue. So, here is my topic!

1) Proposition 8 in California: The Truth is, this fight is not over! The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals on February 7th, 2012 just upheld the overturn on the people's decision to keep traditional marriage as the only legal marriage in California. We now have to take the fight to the Supreme Court!
-Research Questions: Why is the fight to uphold traditional marriage not over? What are the effects of gay marriage in California and why are we as members of the Church so against it?

Saturday, February 25, 2012

Reflection on Rhetorical Analysis!

Well, 2nd paper is done and out of the way. Comparing it to the OpEd I must admit that I liked the OpEd better. Although, I loved writing about tennis. Both papers had their ups and downs, I just liked the OpEd style better than the Rhetorical Analysis. I like writing with my own opinion, and not just analyzing rhetoric of another writer. I'm very excited for the Issues Paper and can't wait to get working on it!

Thursday, February 23, 2012

Now There's A Match: Breaking down Djokovic vs. Nadal for Tennis Fanatics!

The game of tennis has been around since the time of European monasteries (Where monks played a form of it with a rope tied across a courtyard). Throughout the years, it has evolved into a game of sharp strategies and powerful hits. Tennis is a sport that is as international as it comes, with star athletes hailing from any country in the world. The four major tennis competitions are the Opens (US, French, Australian, and Wimbledon). Here is where tennis athletes prove themselves; winning an Open is equivalent to winning the Super Bowl in tennis lingo. This past January held the Australian Open, a hard court tournament. The Finals match was epic beyond belief, with a near 6 hour match between the number 1 and 2 in the world…. Novak Djokivic and Rafael Nadal. So, naturally with the match being one of the most watched events of the month, blogs popped up all over the Internet about it. One of these was from the New York Times by Craig O’Shannessy. He responded to tennis fanatics desire to know every gritty detail of the match, every possible strategy in Djokovic’s game to beat the animal Nadal. His blog also offered some strategy advice to Nadal; some aspects maybe that he could change to beat the new animal in the zoo. New York Times Blogger Craig O’Shannessy breaks down the monumental match in an effective blog; informing tennis fans of the match using diction, authority in use of tennis terms, and appealing to logic with use of statistical evidence from the match.

Diction is important in any piece of rhetoric; and this being a sports piece; of course, the diction must reflect athleticism, speed, and triumph. O’Shannessy uses words like: “Heroic victory”, “engine room for victory”, and “aggressor” to illustrate the tennis match between Djokovic and Nadal. These words and phrases (as well as many others) are positioned throughout the blog to show the hard work and sweat put into this match. This match was one between the two top male tennis players in the world. Both have very different strategies; with everyone knowing that it would be a hard match to win for both. Readers needed to know these strategies in detail. O’Shannessy wrote how the strategies included Nadal’s typical plan to attack the net with powerful volleys and overheads. Reader’s found out that his typical attack was thwarted by Djokovics’s aggressive serve return. This is one of his major weapons, and it forced Nadal to stay behind the baseline running to lob balls back over the net. Djokovic got Nadal moving, forcing him to play every ball and never end the point. Djokovic ended points with big shots that shocked Nadal. “Aggression”, “dominating”, and “rewards” show tennis followers that the match was indeed one that stood up to everyone’s expectations. Part of the purpose of the blog was to offer advice to Nadal on how to overcome Djokovic in future match-ups.  O’Shannessy needed to show this in his blog through his diction. With phrases like “Answers are simple”, “involve courage”, and “out of his comfort zone”, he offers advice to Nadal that he needs to get out of his comfort zone and attack. He needs to be the aggressor to be rewarded in the game of tennis. This effective aspect of rhetoric helps fans realize the effort invested into this match, all for the win that brings the glory.

Along with great diction in the blog comes an authority that only one who really knows tennis can portray. This authority is seen in the way O’Shannessy uses real tennis terms. “Return”, “ground stokes”, and “serve motion” were all aspects of the game that O’Shannessy analyzed for fans. Tennis fans reading this blog loved this! As I was reading this for example, I really got into it. I knew that O’Shannessy knew his tennis stuff because he used phrases that I have used ever since I started playing tennis like “baseline rallies”, and “attacking the net”. Tennis players know all these strategies and saw them in the match between Djokovic and Nadal. So, we had to see them be analyzed in the blog. And O’Shannessy delivered, showing us his tennis knowledge.  He goes into great detail of Djokovic’s wicked return. He refers to it as his “first strike weapon”, and attributed Djokovic’s win to this aspect of his game. He says that Nadal needs to adapt to this style of play and work at overcoming it if he is ever going to win against Djokovic. This is another aspect of the blog that readers loved, the advice that was offered to Nadal on what to do against Djokovic next time. Tennis fans all over the world know that this will not be their last meeting. With O’Shannessy’s advice, he just builds the anticipation for the next match. Tennis fans will be waiting.

O’Shannessy also appeals to logic by providing statistical evidence to readers. This numerical evidence of the match is used throughout the blog: counts of body serves compared to down the middle serves, percentages of serves in, numbers of forehands compared to backhands, the list goes on.  With 36 groundstroke winners from Djokovic, 5 return winners, and 34% of hits from inside the base line, this evidence proves to readers that Djokovic was the clear winner. This statistical evidence presented by O’Shannessy to blog-reading, tennis-playing fanatics appeal to the logic of the match. Fans want to see the stats, want to know that the numbers actually show the winner. Obviously, Djokovic should have won because his stats were that much better. He came out on top of the match; resulting in the win and the title of the Australian Open.

Blog writer Craig O’Shannessy wrote about the Australian Open finals match between Novak Djokovic and Rafael Nadal, using diction, authority, and logical appeals to convey to his readers the drama of the match and to offer Nadal some pointers. This blog was effective in its purpose to inform readers of the match and weaknesses and strengths in the two player’s tennis games. Tennis is a game of skill and precision, speed and power. This blog effectively portrays that, and invites readers to stay updated on more of the Djokovic-Nadal rivalry!

Wednesday, February 22, 2012

Peer Review of the RA!

Well, my peer review experience was pretty similar to the OpEd process because I was out of town with Tiffany Pao and we had to review each others. But, peer review in general always helps. Tiffany and I were able to help each other and pointed out things that the other would not have noticed. It is always vital to have a second opinion when writing. Tiffany helped me organize and edit my paper and I hope I did the same for her.

Saturday, February 18, 2012

San Diego!

Well, here we are. A 3 day weekend to celebrate Presidents; but for us college students, this means get out of the bubble! So, I’m off to San Diego! San Diego is one of my favorite vacation spots in the world, and it just so happens that one of my best friends lives here now. Road trip to her house with 3 of my best friends! Along the way I was thinking about different figurative language devices that I would use in my paper…. Wait…. Who am I kidding? I didn’t think about that at all! That’s what weekends are for right? Well, this is my post. I really have put thought into my paper, I just am not planning on thinking about it this weekend. Deuces everyone! Have a good weekend.

Thursday, February 16, 2012

Rhetorical Analysis Figurative Language

Well.... FIRST of all. I JUST got my mission call like 2 hours ago and don't feel like doing homework AT ALL!!!! But, I have to of course. Me being the student that I am. I will be serving in the Mexico, Merida Mission speaking the Spanish language. I will report to the MTC on May 23rd! I just can't wait to serve the people of Mexico. Enjoy the pics!

Anyways... In my Rhetorical Analysis Paper I utilize several figurative language devices. I will list them as follows...
1) Diction: know every gritty detail
2) Metaphor: every possible strategy in Djokovic’s game to beat the animal Nadal.
3) I use some irony in the way that I describe how it is ironic that Djokovic is now on top. 

There are some other aspects of figurative language that I use throughout my paper, but I will save those for you to see in the actual paper. ;) 

Wednesday, February 8, 2012

Rhetorical Analysis: Thesis Statement.

I chose to write my Rhetorical Analysis on the Tennis Blog by New York Times Blogger Craig O'Shannessy titled Djokovic vs. Nadal: Breaking it Down. This blog is awesome and will really help me get into the game of tennis and the epic Australian Open Finals Match between Rafael Nadal and Novak Djokovic. My thesis will be as follows.... (Subject to some change!)

Thesis: Djokovic vs. Nadal: Breaking it down is an effective blog written by New York Times Blogger Craig O'Shannessy to inform tennis fanatics of the intense match between Rafael Nadal and Novak Djokovic. This blog uses diction, authority in use of tennis terms, and accurate analysis of strategies used by the contenders.

Wednesday, February 1, 2012

Rhetorical Analysis: 3 Possible Blogs to Analyze

Well, I went straight to the New York Times Blog Directory. Here, there are over 20 blogs in all sorts of areas. Browsing through these, I saw immediately the topics that I might want to cover. I saw Media Coder, which is a blog that posts about movies, books, and other media sources. The next blog I went to was called Straight Sets, a blog focusing completely on tennis, which is my favorite sport to both play and watch. GO JOHN ISNER! Then, the last blog I looked at was by Mark Bittman-and is all about Food. My favorite thing on Earth. So searching these blogs I have found these 3 posts to possible analyze-Tell me what you think!

1) Media Coder: Barnes and Noble Won't Sell Books from Amazon Publishing. This is all about Amazon's recent publishing efforts on their own publishing, very much against Barnes and Noble's will.

2) Straight Sets: Djokovic vs. Nadal; Breaking it Down.  An epic description of an epic Australian Open Mens Finals Match between Rafael Nadal and Novak Djokovic. Amazing.

3) Mark Bittmans Blog on Food and the Politics of It: Wait. So People are Cooking? This awesome blog post is all about refuting the thought that low to middle income families are not actually cooking, but rather spending money on fast food. Mark Bittman provides evidence that this is false, and that more people are cooking than experts thought.

So, these are the blogs that I'm thinking of analyzing. All 3 are awesome subjects that I would love to write about- So let me hear your opinions on which one I should do!

OpEd Process.... Was it Worth it?

These past few weeks of Wring 150 we have been able to write our own Opinion Editorial. We started with a blank sheet of paper, willing ideas to come to us. We transferred these ideas to our Blogs-which for many of us was a new experience to be Blogging! From these ideas we started our papers. My paper formed from the idea that I want all BYU students to appreciate and enjoy In-N-Out burgers as much as I do. This idea gave rise to a 900 word Opinion Editorial that worked on persuading all my readers that In-N-Out has the freshest ingredients, a strong work ethic, and is cheaper than other competition gourmet burger places!

 Particularly helpful throughout this process was the step-by-step process by which we had to go about writing our paper. We were required to have multiple drafts, which helped me keep going back to my paper and continuing to make it even better. Another aspect of the process that I particularly liked was the Peer Edit. This helped me to really see how my persuasive powers worked in my writing. I was able to make people who read it.... HUNGRY! That was one of my goals. I made them crave In-N-Out. But the Peer Edit helped me realize some minor mistakes and helped me make my paper just how I wanted it.