Accompanied by an already ridiculing tone, the author, Karen Matthews quickly asserts her main contention with the title ‘Penalty rates cut to hit workers hard, while rorting MPs have snout in trough’ in an article published on the 4th of March, 2017. Matthews also includes a political cartoon entailing hypocrisy and inequality between two figures who are affected by the issue at hand. Throughout the article, the writer argues that the reduction in penalty rates is harmful, and incorporates the cartoon to support the same contention in a simpler and more visual form.
The author initially proposes an argument supported by the Rogerian model of persuasion, which is used to incline the reader to hold belief of predisposed open mindedness and willingness
…show more content…
This form of argumentation relies on character and a sense of reliability and trust. The personal branding of the author and the writing style used to implement the argument is crucial to appealing to the reader’s emotions and actions. In response to the actions of ‘cheating pollies’, the writer argues that there is clear injustice and action needs to be taken. “I propose a system that might just make them think twice. What if we punished rorting politicians…?” Rather than to empathise with those affected by the penalty rate cuts, the author’s motive is to instigate feelings of indignation. Consequently, the author creates a clear separation between the MPs she is criticising and the readers, grouping herself in with the latter to encourage uproar and create a unified tone of general outrage. By doing so, she uses her credentials as an ordinary person, just like the reader, as opposed to the MPs to persuade the readers and to highlight inequality that she feels is necessary to act upon. Matthews also reinforces these feelings of unity and inclusion with the use of colloquial language. “Let’s face it we’re witnessing major inequality here and things need to change.” In an attempt to appeal to her audience of regular people and allow for a mutual sense of understanding, the sentence is very informal and simple. This further reinforces the author’s attempt at creating outrage reliant on the author’s credentials and reputation that is shared with the
In her piece Low-wage Senate workers get a raise- and then the shaft, Catherine Rampell tells the story of “low-wage federal contract workers” who carried out “a series of strikes” in demand of sufficient “living wage” and “a union.” As these events occurred at the Senate cafeteria, Rampell notes that the workers “attracted powerful allies to their cause.” However, the rest of the tale does not end as happily. Despite the combined achievements of the workers and “powerful allies”, Rampell reveals the detail the senators fail to acknowledge: the fact that “some workers were shortchanged.”
Over the course of the month we have studied Eli Hager’s “For men in prison child support becomes a crushing debt”, Dana Rorabacher’s “My fellow conservatives should protect medical marijuana”, and Andreas Elpidorou’s “The quiet alarm”. Individual claims, audiences, and appeals vary drastically throughout the texts, but as we break them down we begin to uncover similarities between the trio. This analysis will expose techniques, strategies, and evidence while discovering the rhetorical appeals behind each one.
review of the rhetorical situation for my assignment three. The purpose of this assignment is to
Persuasion: involves one or more persons who are engaged in the activity of creating, reinforcing, modifying, or extinguishing, beliefs, attitudes, intentions, motivation, and or behaviors within the constraints of a given communication context -- an activity or process, persuasion is a tow way street
This theory was first created by Ajzen and Fishbein in 1980. This theory provides a framework to study the attitudes that support behaviours and suggests that the most important determinate of an individual’s behaviour is their behavioural intent. This is the individual’s intention to preform a certain behaviour, which is formed from a combination of their attitude towards the behaviour and the subject norm. (The subject norm is the individual’s perception of what others expect them to do).
purposefully made towards others in the working class, as they can directly relate with what
Effective speakers captivate audiences through the promotion of provocative ideas with timeless appeal. These ideas challenge the audience’s perceptions, forcing them to reflect upon their prejudices. Consequently, the speaker’s ideas ignite their audience’s compassion, unifying and propelling them towards the betterment of society in and beyond a contemporary context. This is evident in Former Prime Minister Kevin Rudd’s “The Apology” and J.K. Rowling’s “The Fringe Benefits of Failure and The Importance of Imagination” as both speeches oppose the notion of privilege and negligence toward the unfortunate in regard to controversial
This week saw the Fair Work Commission (FWC) bring down an adjustment to Penalty rates in Australia for some Retail and Hospitality Workers. If you read the newspapers, listen to the radio, and watch TV coverage it comes across as the greatest betrayal of the working man (or woman) since the great Depression.
After spending a good amount of the semester discussing and learning about Robert Cialdini, it is safe to say that no good discussion on influence and persuasion can go very far without talking about the man who wrote the book on influence. After learning about Cialdini, we now know what he identifies as the six weapons of influence. The six weapons are reciprocity, commitment and consistency, social proof, liking, authority and scarcity. By weapons, what Cialdini really relays, are the six behavioral triggers that tend to create habitual and expected compliance. To see if these influences really exist in the real world, we made trips to places where we were going to be potential customers, being sold a product or service by someone. We
In the technical sense, penalty rates are a form of tangible benefit within the financial context which generally refers to those payments made to workers outside normal working hours. Regulator motivations for including penalty rates in modern awards as stated by (Sloane, 2014) are twofold: firstly, to compensate workers for work performed during what was historically known as ‘unsociable hours’ and secondly, to dissuade employers from operating within those hours. However, as advocated by (Sheldon & Thornthwaite, 2013) the modern award reviews have ‘provided a forum for employers and their associations to escalate their campaign to the significance of penalty rates in industries operating during the traditionally ‘unsociable hours’, which is evidence that employer associations prefer to enhance managerial prerogative over productivity which is predominantly concerned with the cost of resources. The push for the examination of provisions regarding penalty rates has mostly been seen to affect the tourism and retail industries.
According to Laurie Monsebraaten and Zoe McKnight of the Toronto Star (2013), a whopping 50% of Ontario workers of all income levels get by with precarious work - which has no benefits, often low paying, and often temporary. To make matters even worse, the way the Employment Standards Act handles precarious work allows for legal loopholes that effect temporary and fulltime workers alike. Fortunately, the Ontario government is aware of the situation and is proposing changes to benefit employees. For me, the three most important changes are to paid vacation time, over time hours, and schedule-change compensation.
The 2016 Presidential Election is approaching quickly, and as is customary a number of highly controversial issues have taken center stage and each side argues their position with oftentimes charged rhetoric. Using the rhetorical strategies discussed in class (ethos, pathos, and logos) in varying degrees and combinations both Democrats and Republicans appeal to their base and attempt to reach out to those who are on the fence. Oftentimes, whether a presentation or piece of controversial writing is political or apolitical a sizable majority of the readership will begin reading with preconceived notions. Those who take a hardline stance against the writer's position typically will never be convinced to adopt it. However, a large minority of readers
The most distressing thing about his article, to me, is its prevailing tone of hysteria. I don’t think this helps anyone and may do a good deal of harm. The hostility he evinces towards Peter Martins will surprise nobody who has followed his writing in recent years; in practical effect, however, all it’s likely to do will be to alienate those in power at NYCB, the very same
This essay will argue that the concept of ‘worker’ defined under section 230 of the Employment Rights Act (“ERA”) 1996 is board; however, due to the undefined scope of section 230(3) of ERA 1996, employment tribunals and the courts have adapted a rigid approach in their interpretation; that there is a ‘high degree of legal uncertainty’ as established in this area of law; that the law does not adequately deal with non-standard forms of ‘workers’; present proposals for reform by the UK Parliament on the interpretation and application of law at common; and finally provide a conclusion for the arguments put forth.
George Orwell once said, “freedom is the right to tell people what they do not want to hear”, that, essentially, “speaking the truth in times of universal deceit is a revolutionary act”. (“George Orwell”) Orwell’s words reveal his political views in the absolute truest form. His uninhibited writing style forced readers to not only to listen what he had to say, but to also recognize his writing as the truth. Although his veracity was supposed to be accepted without question, Orwell defined oppressive ideas of the government by exposing elements such as class division, and the failed attempts of the middle class to establish a meaningful union with the working class. Through his symbolic storytelling in