Los Angeles Times Argument Analysis

In recent news, the New York Times and the Los Angeles Times put pen to paper to depict their opinions on the matter of human impact on the environment. More specifically, they included topics such as air pollution at docking terminals and renewable fuel. Joe Jobe, Chief Executive Officer for the National Biodiesel Board, wrote with a nonchalant, or matter-of-fact, tone to disprove false claims made about environmental laws. His argument was titled The Renewable Fuel Standard. While, on the other hand, the Times Editorial Board for the Los Angeles Times spoke with an accusing tone on air pollution in order to expose the unjust behavior of Los Angeles officials. His argument was titled L.A. needs fewer platitudes and more action on port …show more content…
The article Jobe is discoursing, discusses the negatives of the Renewable Fuel Standard, stating that the law, which mandated that oil refiners blend ethanol into gasoline, has “driven up food costs while failing to deliver its promised environmental benefits” (Jobe). The Chief Executive Officer for the National Biodiesel Board’s purpose in writing his opinion was to disprove these claims made by Coral Davenport, the energy and environment correspondent for the National Journal. He does so by assembling concise statements in order to get his point across, or aphorism. This piece is sure to grasp the attention of a wide ranging audience. The farmers in Iowa who grow the ethanol, the families who are purchasing food to feed their families, economists, and environmentalists will want to read this article. This issue effects a larger collection of individuals than just farmers in Iowa who are thriving from the law; it affects Americans everywhere, and we should all be a part of this …show more content…
Based on these two pieces, which are only diminutive examples of the differences in the coasts, The New York Times seems to have a more positive outlook on environmental concerns. Their laws, however debated, seem to be reducing harmful emissions, while Los Angeles is still concerned for their future and demand action.

While comparing the two articles, the Joe Jobe also seemed to make a stronger argument. This is purely based off the fact that he properly balanced ethos, logos, and pathos. In other words, he proved his credibility, appealed to the audience’s emotions, and he backed up his claims with facts. These ideas are crucial in writing along with a clear purpose and in order to write a successful argument piece, and for writing in