Argument Analysis: Stephen Colbert and Migrant Workers
Stephen Colbert appeared before members of congress to discuss a new law that will affect migrant workers. Colbert’s initial idea was to stop eating fruits and vegetables. This seemed to be in humor. Later in the paper Colbert made a more serious suggestion that congress should implement this proposed law in order to provide protection for the workers.
Analysis
Strengths Colbert’s speech had a few strengths, one of these being attention getting. He used humor throughout the speech and it was mostly on topic. His opening line, once he commenced with the formalities, was a joke, he took a jab offering up that the solution to the migrant worker issue is for Americans to simply stop eating the products of the labor, he then remarked that most Americans already have. He used humor to make people pay attention to him. He also made sure to provide more serious information to solidify his statements. His strengths made his speech memorable and thought provoking (C-Span, 2010).
Weaknesses
Some of Colbert’s weaknesses were his strengths gone wrong. While his humor was a highlight of his speech, it …show more content…
He did not use a variety of persuasive tactics mostly sticking to humor. His audience seemed disinterested in what he had to say. In a more real world perspective this argument does fulfil some goals. It has captured the attentions of many people and perhaps opened a national dialogue on migrant worker protection. To judge this argument good or bad would be subjective, where one person sees a strength others may see a weakness. The true validity of an argument lies in whether the audience receive the message, and what they chose to do with it; there is no clear answer to this as the topic is controversial and has many viewpoints that are difficult to track. The argument simply is another drop in the
Stephen Colbert appeared before members of congress to discuss a new law that will affect migrant workers. Colbert’s initial idea was to stop eating fruits and vegetables. This seemed to be in humor. Later in the paper Colbert made a more serious suggestion that congress should implement this proposed law in order to provide protection for the workers.
Analysis
Strengths Colbert’s speech had a few strengths, one of these being attention getting. He used humor throughout the speech and it was mostly on topic. His opening line, once he commenced with the formalities, was a joke, he took a jab offering up that the solution to the migrant worker issue is for Americans to simply stop eating the products of the labor, he then remarked that most Americans already have. He used humor to make people pay attention to him. He also made sure to provide more serious information to solidify his statements. His strengths made his speech memorable and thought provoking (C-Span, 2010).
Weaknesses
Some of Colbert’s weaknesses were his strengths gone wrong. While his humor was a highlight of his speech, it …show more content…
He did not use a variety of persuasive tactics mostly sticking to humor. His audience seemed disinterested in what he had to say. In a more real world perspective this argument does fulfil some goals. It has captured the attentions of many people and perhaps opened a national dialogue on migrant worker protection. To judge this argument good or bad would be subjective, where one person sees a strength others may see a weakness. The true validity of an argument lies in whether the audience receive the message, and what they chose to do with it; there is no clear answer to this as the topic is controversial and has many viewpoints that are difficult to track. The argument simply is another drop in the