The first article that I analyzed came from www.ottawacitizen.com titled “Dozens of oil pipeline protestors arrested on parliament hill.” Firstly, the hidden assumption falls in the title in which it assumes that it was a violent crowd with most people acting in a rowdy manner. It goes on to quote an ‘organizer’: “[It was] the largest act of youth-led climate civil disobedience in Canadian history.” However, it doesn’t specifically mention what organization it was that this statement came from. Since, it is uncanny for an organizer to bash on its own event, not including the title is showing a lack of research in addition to faulty logic. Finally, by defining terms such as “civil disobedience,” “raucous,” and …show more content…
“Young activists cut their teeth with Ottawa arrests as they gear up for national pipeline fight,” was the title of the article. Hidden assumptions are that you need to ‘fight fire with fire’ in order to succeed. In this blog, there are many statements that aren’t supported with research. For instance, it mentions another protest in Ottawa that is run by the Human Rights Monument, and mentions that the reasoning for their protest is that their nearby hydro-electricity plant will ruin their lives. This is a good addition to add to the blog if it were backed up by another source or were cited properly. Also, “civil disobedience,” and “unjust law” are a few terms that should be defined to properly stage what they’re trying to argue. Most importantly, this article talks about using civil disobedience to bring attention to an unfair law. Therefore, the logic that civil disobedience is the answer to an unjust law is an error because more disobedience doesn’t answer to greater unjust