Question
Both Porters and Strupp's articles cover the same event and raise the ethical question of weather or not to publish a disturbing photo of a baby who later died as a result of the Oklahoma City bombing. What is the argument of each? How does the first person testimony by porter convey a different perspective than Strupp's more journalistic coverage? What rhetorical strategies are at work in each one?
Response: The argument in Charles Porters article is not really much of an argument, he just writes about how the picture came to be and what he got out of it and I guess as readers we just assume that he felt it was okay to publish the picture where in Joe Strupp’s article the argument is clearly that he felt it was okay,even though he does discuss both sides of the arguments with quotes from some from newspapers, for example Ashley Haley’s reasoning in the Inquires National Editor or Saltzman’s of the Sacramento Bee, Strupp definitely gives way more credit to why it was okay to be published than not, he questions it being wrong but always has something to back it up whether it be a quote or just a shocking statement for example Tom Goldstein’s quote “Newspapers are supposed to reflect the world and that’s what they did, there seems to be absolutely no doubt in my mind that those riveting photos should have been used no doubt. …show more content…
It’s not something that you necessarily want to look at during breakfast but they are riveting”. Obviously. having a first person kind of experience toward something gives you much more credibility but unfortunately for me in this case, I think Charles Porters testimony was actually way less credible than Joe Strupp's. Where Charles porter mainly talks about what he got out of it he completely ignores any real news or input about the actual incident where, Joe Strupp goes more deep with his writing and actually questions himself and others asking various individuals for their input about the incident and just overall putting more effort into his article, Making a much larger impact than Porters article ever could. Ethos, Pathos and Logos all come into play in the two articles, Pathos especially. Even just in the title of the articles (Tragedy in Oklahoma and The Photo Felt Around the World) it tells you, you're going to read something that is going to probably pull on a couple heart strings. Ethos is at work in Joe Strupp's article as well, being an individual who has won so many Journalism Awards it’s understandable why someone wouldn’t question him as far as what he is doing and respecting his research. Question Porters account ends with the offer of publication and Strupp’s article takes up the debate among editors and officials about whether to publish. How does each one address a different audience? What is the Kairos shaping each stance and the argument of each? Response: Charles Porter article would more likely attract more of the “general” audience, its more something you can find read about anywhere and of course in this situation it was literally talked about everywhere so with the situation being an issue that everyone wanted to have the latest news on you can see how Porters article would be
Both Porters and Strupp's articles cover the same event and raise the ethical question of weather or not to publish a disturbing photo of a baby who later died as a result of the Oklahoma City bombing. What is the argument of each? How does the first person testimony by porter convey a different perspective than Strupp's more journalistic coverage? What rhetorical strategies are at work in each one?
Response: The argument in Charles Porters article is not really much of an argument, he just writes about how the picture came to be and what he got out of it and I guess as readers we just assume that he felt it was okay to publish the picture where in Joe Strupp’s article the argument is clearly that he felt it was okay,even though he does discuss both sides of the arguments with quotes from some from newspapers, for example Ashley Haley’s reasoning in the Inquires National Editor or Saltzman’s of the Sacramento Bee, Strupp definitely gives way more credit to why it was okay to be published than not, he questions it being wrong but always has something to back it up whether it be a quote or just a shocking statement for example Tom Goldstein’s quote “Newspapers are supposed to reflect the world and that’s what they did, there seems to be absolutely no doubt in my mind that those riveting photos should have been used no doubt. …show more content…
It’s not something that you necessarily want to look at during breakfast but they are riveting”. Obviously. having a first person kind of experience toward something gives you much more credibility but unfortunately for me in this case, I think Charles Porters testimony was actually way less credible than Joe Strupp's. Where Charles porter mainly talks about what he got out of it he completely ignores any real news or input about the actual incident where, Joe Strupp goes more deep with his writing and actually questions himself and others asking various individuals for their input about the incident and just overall putting more effort into his article, Making a much larger impact than Porters article ever could. Ethos, Pathos and Logos all come into play in the two articles, Pathos especially. Even just in the title of the articles (Tragedy in Oklahoma and The Photo Felt Around the World) it tells you, you're going to read something that is going to probably pull on a couple heart strings. Ethos is at work in Joe Strupp's article as well, being an individual who has won so many Journalism Awards it’s understandable why someone wouldn’t question him as far as what he is doing and respecting his research. Question Porters account ends with the offer of publication and Strupp’s article takes up the debate among editors and officials about whether to publish. How does each one address a different audience? What is the Kairos shaping each stance and the argument of each? Response: Charles Porter article would more likely attract more of the “general” audience, its more something you can find read about anywhere and of course in this situation it was literally talked about everywhere so with the situation being an issue that everyone wanted to have the latest news on you can see how Porters article would be