When writing an article to persuade your audience on a specific idea or topic, it is important to be very direct about what it is you are trying to persuade, leave out fallacies, and also have excellent credibility. Based on the two articles about adding a tax on sugary drinks or not, the article “Soda Taxes Fall Flat: Our View” by USA Today Editorial Board, is stronger than the article by Jim Krieger. I will first give you a short overview of each article and then inform you about details of why the article by the USA Today Editorial Board is a stronger article.
First, I will start by giving you an overview of the article by the USA Today Editorial Board. This article started off strong by stating their argument right away. The argument of this article is, “Better-informed consumers, not …show more content…
He adds in many details about Tabaco, and is directly comparing it to sugar, which is not as similar of a product as he is trying to make it seem. For example, Krieger says, “Tabaco taxes have reduced smoking, while raising money to make lives better. Taxing sugary drinks would do the same…” (para. 2). This is a weak analogy, because he should have compared sugar to something that was more like itself, whereas Tabaco is a completely different product. Also, for this article, the only source that Krieger used was himself. This really weakened his argument, where he should have used another more credible source. For example, Krieger gives the statistic, “…Half of U.S. adults and two-thirds of youth consume at least one per day – adding up to 50 gallons per person each year.” (para. 5). He does not inform his audience about where he found this information, or what study or survey was given to collect this data. Providing us with this information would have made his article more
First, I will start by giving you an overview of the article by the USA Today Editorial Board. This article started off strong by stating their argument right away. The argument of this article is, “Better-informed consumers, not …show more content…
He adds in many details about Tabaco, and is directly comparing it to sugar, which is not as similar of a product as he is trying to make it seem. For example, Krieger says, “Tabaco taxes have reduced smoking, while raising money to make lives better. Taxing sugary drinks would do the same…” (para. 2). This is a weak analogy, because he should have compared sugar to something that was more like itself, whereas Tabaco is a completely different product. Also, for this article, the only source that Krieger used was himself. This really weakened his argument, where he should have used another more credible source. For example, Krieger gives the statistic, “…Half of U.S. adults and two-thirds of youth consume at least one per day – adding up to 50 gallons per person each year.” (para. 5). He does not inform his audience about where he found this information, or what study or survey was given to collect this data. Providing us with this information would have made his article more