For this constructive rhetorical analysis, I chose two sources one being academic and the other a popular source. The academic source is written by Joseph E. Potter, Imelda M. Flores-Vazquez, Richard L. Allgeyer, Pete Schenkkan, and Amanda J. Stevenson, from the New England Journal of Medicine titled, Effect of Removal of Planned Parenthood from the Texas Women’s Health. The popular source chosen is written by Deborah Netburn, of the Los Angeles Times titled, After Texas stopped funding Planned Parenthood, low-income women had more babies. The academic article by Joseph E. Potter and colleagues researches the effects of Planned Parenthood cuts in Texas while Netbur’s, article uses the research done by Joseph E. Potter to write a segment for
…show more content…
The academic articles by Joseph E. Potter and colleagues, uses methodological steps, first by providing a brief history of the topic, then formation of hypotheses followed by data collection, concluded by results and discussion where they state their claim, “implementation of the 2013 exclusion of Planned Parenthood affiliates from a Medicaid waiver program in Texas was associated with adverse changes in the rates of provision and continuation of contraception and with increases in the rate of childbirth covered by Medicaid” (Potter et al. 2016:860). As the academic article makes the claim towards the end the popular source by Deborah Newborn, makes the claims in the beginning of the article stating that, “The state of Texas’ sustained campaign against Planned Parenthood and other family planning clinics affiliated with abortion providers appears to have led to an increase in births among low-income women who lost access to affordable and effective birth control, a new study says”(2016). The disparities in these organizational approaches is to build a relationship between the author and reader in different discourse communities (Hyland …show more content…
In order to achieve this, the writers’ must know their target audience and their knowledge base (Hyland 2010). Different discourse communities use different jargon and it is the writer’s job to present an argument for an audience that it is intended for. An example in the academic source states, “The proportion of women returning for a subsequent on-time contraceptive injection in counties with Planned Parenthood affiliates was lower after the exclusion. Specifically, the percentage of women decreased from 56.9% to 37.7% in counties with Planned Parenthood affiliates but increased from 54.9% to 58.5% in counties without such affiliates (estimated difference in differences for counties with affiliates as compared with those without affiliates, −22.9 percentage points; Ps authority in the topic by providing the reader where the information comes from to back up their claims (Hyland:2010). In the academic source by Joseph and colleagues, their credibility relies on their research and data that they gathered. They state, “Our data included all pharmacy and medical claims from January 1, 2011, to December 31, 2014, under public fee-for-service family-planning insurance programs in Texas. We also accessed all claims for childbirth covered by Medicaid using unique identifications for two cohorts of women who use injectable contraceptives… (2016:854). The
The academic articles by Joseph E. Potter and colleagues, uses methodological steps, first by providing a brief history of the topic, then formation of hypotheses followed by data collection, concluded by results and discussion where they state their claim, “implementation of the 2013 exclusion of Planned Parenthood affiliates from a Medicaid waiver program in Texas was associated with adverse changes in the rates of provision and continuation of contraception and with increases in the rate of childbirth covered by Medicaid” (Potter et al. 2016:860). As the academic article makes the claim towards the end the popular source by Deborah Newborn, makes the claims in the beginning of the article stating that, “The state of Texas’ sustained campaign against Planned Parenthood and other family planning clinics affiliated with abortion providers appears to have led to an increase in births among low-income women who lost access to affordable and effective birth control, a new study says”(2016). The disparities in these organizational approaches is to build a relationship between the author and reader in different discourse communities (Hyland …show more content…
In order to achieve this, the writers’ must know their target audience and their knowledge base (Hyland 2010). Different discourse communities use different jargon and it is the writer’s job to present an argument for an audience that it is intended for. An example in the academic source states, “The proportion of women returning for a subsequent on-time contraceptive injection in counties with Planned Parenthood affiliates was lower after the exclusion. Specifically, the percentage of women decreased from 56.9% to 37.7% in counties with Planned Parenthood affiliates but increased from 54.9% to 58.5% in counties without such affiliates (estimated difference in differences for counties with affiliates as compared with those without affiliates, −22.9 percentage points; Ps authority in the topic by providing the reader where the information comes from to back up their claims (Hyland:2010). In the academic source by Joseph and colleagues, their credibility relies on their research and data that they gathered. They state, “Our data included all pharmacy and medical claims from January 1, 2011, to December 31, 2014, under public fee-for-service family-planning insurance programs in Texas. We also accessed all claims for childbirth covered by Medicaid using unique identifications for two cohorts of women who use injectable contraceptives… (2016:854). The