ILS 2385: Fake News: A Rhetorical Analysis
Background and Purpose
In the past 6 years or so, fake news has become a major controversy around the world, especially in the United States. These conversations about fake news have raised fundamental questions about how we define facts, how we use information to support our arguments and form our worldviews, and ultimately how we determine what is true.
For this paper, we’ll step back and look at fake news as part of a broader spectrum of news credibility. This paper’s primary purpose is to further develop the critical thinking and information literacy skills helpful for evaluating the credibility and analyzing the other rhetoric elements of news sources (or outlets that present themselves as "news" sources). Another purpose is to reflect on the broader significance and relevance of news and credibility in the world today.
Your essay should be 4 FULL pages minimum and no more than 5 FULL typed double spaced pages, and will analyze a selected source's rhetoric. Focus on evaluating the source’s credibility (ethos), but also consider analyzing the article’s logic (logos) and emotional appeals (pathos). MLA format is required for this assignment. You must cite at least 2 reliable sources to support your argument. Remember that for a source to appear in your Works Cited page, it must appear and be cited in your essay
PURPOSE: The purpose of this assignment is to carefully examine the rhetorical situation of the article/piece to determine HOW the author is primarily attempting to persuade their audience (logos, pathos, ethos), for what purpose, and how should it be classified using Zimdar's classification system (see below).
Your interpretation and analysis is an argument and must be supported with evidence, and you must clearly demonstrate how you arrive at your conclusions.
You should take into consideration all information on the webpage (the article, any ads, videos, etc.) to determine the following.
AUDIENCE: Write your paper to an academic and scholarly audience with a diverse range of political perspectives.
See all "Tips and Resources" Below regarding focus/thesis, structure, and development of ideas:
Tools for Evaluating Credibility and Analyzing Rhetoric
Use whichever of the provided resources and concepts that help you develop the most effective rhetorical analysis of your article:
- “Zimdars’ Classifications": for classifying the type of news
- “CRAAP Test": for evaluating the credibility of online sources
- “Ten Questions for Fake News Detection": for identifying red flags about the credibility of sources
- “Recognizing Logical Fallacies": for identifying logical fallacies and avoiding them in your own writing
Verifying Validity of Information
-If you question the validity or truthfulness of any information found in your article, you should use the library databases to locate credible sources to gauge the source's truthfulness. If you use quotes or information from a library source, be sure you cite it in-text within your paper and include a works cited page with the source's citation information.
-You may also use a fact checking database to potentially verify information.Select one online news article that fails the CRAAP test and exemplifies one or more of Zimdars’ classifications(e.g. fake news, junk science, satire, and so on). The focus of the assignment is to argue HOW the author attempts to persuade their audience, what it is the author hopes to accomplish (or wants the audience to do), and HOW the article should be classified based on Zimdar's classification system. SEE NOTE ABOUT THREE-LEVEL CLAIM BELOW.
You may wish to contextualize the article and its classification in your introduction, and discuss the significance and/or relevance of both in your conclusion.
If needed, use textual evidence from your article and at least two secondary sources from your own research through the JWU Library, and/or the Internet to verify validity of information presented.
Questions For Analysis:
-Who is the author? What do you know about them? Should they be considered a credible source? Why or why not?
-How did you verify the source's validity or the author's credibility (ethos)? What did you learn?
-What is the author's central message? How do you know? What leads you to believe so?
-Based on what you see within the article and on the webpage, who is the author's intended audience? How do you know? What leads you to believe so?
Think about demographics: age, race, ethnicity, educational level, religious background, gender, sexual identity, class
-Think about mode (text, audio, video, multi-modal) and genre (the use of a webpage). Why did the author make use of these to reach their audience? Why was this perhaps the most effective means to do so?
-How does the author make use of the rhetorical appeals (logos, pathos, and ethos) to influence their audience? Why does the author appeal to their audience this way? Do they rely on one type of rhetorical appeal more than the others? Why might they do that?
-Does the article make use of any logical fallacies?
-How would you classify the article in relation to Zimdars’ classifications? Why?
Tips and Resources
Focus on rhetorical analysis. Here is a clear synopsis of rhetorical analysis from the Texas A&M University’s Writing Center: Rhetoric is the study of how writers and speakers use words to influence an audience. A rhetorical analysis is an essay that breaks a work of non-fiction into parts and then explains how the parts work together to create a certain effect–whether to persuade, entertain or inform. . . . A rhetorical analysis should explore the rhetorician’s goals, the techniques (or tools) used, examples of those techniques, and the effectiveness of those techniques. When writing a rhetorical analysis, you are NOT saying whether or not you agree with the argument. Instead, you’re discussing how the rhetorician makes that argument and whether or not the approach used is successful. Ultimately, you should conclude how it should be classified according to Zimdar's classification system and why.
Craft a three-level OVERALL CLAIM. Try using the following questions to help you develop an overall claim. 1. Conclusion: How would you evaluate the source’s credibility and classify it using to Zimdars’ list?2. Premises: What is problematic about the source’s rhetoric (ethos, logos, pathos)?3. Significance: Why is this article–and articles like it with the same classification–important and/or relevant to you, your audience, and/or our world in general?
Develop and organize your paragraphs around your points of rhetorical analysis. Use the provided concepts around the analysis of the rhetorical situation presented in class to help determine the topics for your paragraphs. Avoid organizing your paper with one paragraph on ethos, one on logos, and one on pathos, since some rhetorical elements may require more in-depth analysis than the others. For example, you may need to devote several paragraphs to exploring different aspects of the article’s ethos, or you may want to explore several logical fallacies and/or emotional appeals over multiple paragraphs.
Develop an effective title, introduction, and conclusion. Use the strategies we have covered in the course readings to craft these components of your paper, all of which can help engage your audience and make your argument stand out. Consider developing a two-paragraph introduction and/or conclusion to help you further contextualize and discuss the topic for your audience.
If you include outside sources to verify the truthfulness/validity of any info presented (or the author's credibility), you are required to include a works cited page and MLA in-text citations. These elements should follow MLA guidelines. See MLA guidelines at OWL Purdue.
As you work toward finalizing your paper, closely examine each sentence for clarity, concision, and focus.
Total Possible Points: 60/
Final Draft, evaluated on the following criteria:
Focus (16 points): Does the essay properly contextualize the article (CRAPP and Zimdar's classification) and discuss the significance and relevance of both to the source's credibility? Does the essay effectively analyze the article's rhetorical situation and discuss what may be problematic about the rhetorical appeals (logos, pathos, ethos)? Does the author clearly communicate why the article is important and/or relevant to them, their audience, and/or our world in general?
Development (16 points): Does the writer provide a detailed and effective analysis of the three rhetorical appeals? Does the writer identify any logical fallacies and discuss how they affect the article's credibility?
Organization (16 points): Do ideas and paragraphs proceed in logical and apparent sequence or pattern? Does writer use sufficient audience cues to let the reader know what has been discussed, what is being discussed, or what will be discussed? Does writer use attention-getting title and lead-in, essay map, summary and forecasting statements, paragraph hooks, transitional words and phrases? Do effective conclusions guide the reader from beginning to end?
Style (6 points): Is language clear direct and readable? Are sentences clear, concise, and easily read by intended audience? Is word choice appropriate for audience? Do sentences reveal and sustain appropriate voice and tone?
Mechanics (6 points): Are there obvious errors in spelling, punctuation, and grammar? Are there patterns of error?
NO 1ST DRAFT ON DUE DATE (-5 POINTS)
NO PEER CRITIQUE (-5 POINTS)
NO REFLECTION (-5 POINTS)
NO PROCESS=NO GRADE
Grading scale:
A 54-60
B 48-53
C 42-47
D 36-41
F 0-41
