The Myth of the Student Loan Crisis

In the midst of several long, plain-looking articles in The Atlantic, the info-graphic portraying the panic surrounding college expenses stands out like a sore thumb.  It logically and convincingly disputes the panic sweeping across the nation using powerful statistics and a coherent structure of information.  The info-graphic argues that not going to college is actually much more expensive than taking the risk and investing in yourself.  The magazine draws attention to the info-graphic right away by placing it on a black background with brightly colored graphs, charts, and text boxes.  Then, once the reader sees the chart, a snippet of background information is included to qualify the argument of millions of Americans afraid of the 150% increase in college costs over the past 18 years.  At the end of the introduction (plain white text against the black background, which also influences the reader because this is less "flashy" than the author's argument) is a rhetorical question that serves to progress the information to the author's argument.  The author chooses to present his information in a flow chart so that his logical reasoning is shown.  He starts out showing how costs are actually lower than expected, using the slightly sarcastic statement, "One year at Harvard costs $57,950.  But most students don't go to Harvard."  A graph is used to portray the distribution of debt students are in after exiting college.  This further portrays how it is rare for students to be drowned in debt, and encourages the reader to reconsider their view towards college expenses.  After the author shows the relatively low cost of schooling, he then progresses his argument to show the return on investment that a college degree has.  By using graphs to portray the information, the author is able to effectively convince the reader that college is a beneficial endeavor.

The Sports Name that Will Never Be

American sports teams exist under a variety of sports names, from the Bears, to the Cornhuskers, to the Heat.  However, as one CNN contributor argues, the name Senators, the former title of Washington's baseball team and the current crest for Ottawa's hockey squad, will never appear again in American sports.  Bob Greene argues that the rating for Congress is so low that fans would not be able to rally around a team named the Senators, and that the name would be an excuse for player scrutiny.  Greene argues that it wouldn't be economically feasible for a team to be named this way.  In a larger sense, the author uses the sports team name argument, a rather random one, to express his disappointment with the government.

This article was written towards an American audience that shares the author's feelings.  Greene doesn't waste time describing how Congress has been ineffective; he is not trying to persuade anyone that Congress is bad.  This may also be because Congress already has an approval rating of less than 20% and arguing against them would be unnecessary.  However, Greene does focus on the effects that a bad Congress has had on American pride.  To emphasize the negativity with which Americans perceive Congress, the author uses anaphora within a periodic sentence to emphasize all of the different sports names in America.  When this is followed by the statement that the Senators cannot be a name, it portrays the extremity with which Americans look down on the Senate.  In addition, Greene quotes sports marketing experts that establish his point.  This establishes ethos and credibility for the author.  In a creative extended metaphor, the author is effective in showing the faults of Congress in the eye of an average American.

Link to Article

American "Diplomat" to North Korea

In the midst of nuclear controversy, North Korea welcomed members of the Harlem Globetrotters to play a game with North Korean basketball stars.  Among those that visited was Dennis Rodman.  Rodman reports meeting and having a long conversation with Kim Jong Un, and even called him a friend, even though Rodman does not condone Kim Jong Un's actions.  Rodman also discussed how the North Korean leader wanted Obama to call him to talk about basketball.  With the events occurring so close to nuclear tests and rocket launches by the North, the article presents a controversy to its audience.  If Kim Jong Un welcomed Rodman in a way that was more than hospitable, should Obama and Congress negotiate or continue to treat North Korea as a terrorist country?  The author of this article aims to ask this question to the reader, having them ponder over the possible consequences.  In order to do this without portraying too much personal bias, the author uses as many quotations as possible.  This way, any outrageous statement made in the article would not reflect on the author. The article goes as far as to include a video of the interview at the top with Rodman speaking to an ESPN reporter.  Also, the article uses very straight-forward diction to deliver the factual content of the article.  This has a similar effect to that of the quotations.  The article does leave the reader contemplating the content, and to make the article more effective, a link to a video discussing the benefits and consequences of the situation is included.  By staying neutral, the author is effective in presenting a very controversial subject while letting the reader make their own decision.

Link to Article