There are many unifying purposes for social media networks; however, in the persuasive article, “Could social media be tearing us apart,” published by Media & Tech Network on the 28 of June in 2016, author Jerry Daykin argues that social media is making society more divisive towards each other. While Daykin agrees that social media is a great unifier, he suggests they are to blame for the amplified debate of political opinions. Social media purposes around unifying, but what network disclaims arguments in their policy agreement? However, since Daykin strongly centralizes his argument by the negative appeal of social media; his credibility is slim due to the reliability of his personal opinion, therefore, a weak argument. In Daykin’s article,
…show more content…
1) is to raise awareness to social media users that social media could be the reason debates have amplified. While Daykin reasons his argument “Could social media be tearing us apart,” he uses several rhetoric devices to help his reasoning, but also weaken it. Daykin reinforces social media’s idea of being unifiers into being the cause of political debates. Daykin’s logos appeal appears when he discusses freedom of speech within social media. Although social media users have the right to post their interests, Daykin concludes it resolves in biased side opinions and arguments. The appeal makes readers think about their future postings which influences Daykin’s argument. He also appeals readers as he lists well-known social media platforms and how they are filtered to an individual’s interest. He concludes his reasoning stating Facebook’s scandal of filtering news, but since the scandal case was not proven at fault, Daykin’s ethnocentric credibility lessens. This causes curiosity, and questioning social media’s tactics to their famous trending tab. He additionally reinforces his reasoning by using immigration views depending on the level of immigration within an area. However, since immigration is a concerning subject to society, it influences his pathos …show more content…
Daykin has successfully reasoned points which provide evidence that social media is to blame, but since Daykin provides examples from his opinion, it causes his credibility to weaken. After reasoning socials media’s algorithms, is it social media’s fault for communing individuals with similar interest? After all, social media was developed to expand individuals who share common interest, but Daykin focuses on the negative aspect of social media; therefore, he gives a bias side conversation accordingly to what warned in his writing. Although, Daykin has partially supported his question, he could have provided more proven evidence to match his argument and the opposing side of his argument. However, the underlying question remains, is social media to blame for their algorithms or is it society’s way of handling
1) is to raise awareness to social media users that social media could be the reason debates have amplified. While Daykin reasons his argument “Could social media be tearing us apart,” he uses several rhetoric devices to help his reasoning, but also weaken it. Daykin reinforces social media’s idea of being unifiers into being the cause of political debates. Daykin’s logos appeal appears when he discusses freedom of speech within social media. Although social media users have the right to post their interests, Daykin concludes it resolves in biased side opinions and arguments. The appeal makes readers think about their future postings which influences Daykin’s argument. He also appeals readers as he lists well-known social media platforms and how they are filtered to an individual’s interest. He concludes his reasoning stating Facebook’s scandal of filtering news, but since the scandal case was not proven at fault, Daykin’s ethnocentric credibility lessens. This causes curiosity, and questioning social media’s tactics to their famous trending tab. He additionally reinforces his reasoning by using immigration views depending on the level of immigration within an area. However, since immigration is a concerning subject to society, it influences his pathos …show more content…
Daykin has successfully reasoned points which provide evidence that social media is to blame, but since Daykin provides examples from his opinion, it causes his credibility to weaken. After reasoning socials media’s algorithms, is it social media’s fault for communing individuals with similar interest? After all, social media was developed to expand individuals who share common interest, but Daykin focuses on the negative aspect of social media; therefore, he gives a bias side conversation accordingly to what warned in his writing. Although, Daykin has partially supported his question, he could have provided more proven evidence to match his argument and the opposing side of his argument. However, the underlying question remains, is social media to blame for their algorithms or is it society’s way of handling