Blog 9

Source Argument

When looking for information about the atrocity that is college athletes being suspended for signing autographs, I found several articles from well-known sports authorities. One stood out as very strong and used some very valid points on why athletes should be allowed to receive money for signing their own names and property. The article was written in August of 2013, and was in response to allegations that Johnny Manziel had received payment for signing his own sports memorabilia. It begins by comparing the former Texas A&M quarterback to Mary Kate and Ashley Olsen. The Olsen twins had clothing brands, makeup lines, and a movie all produced by the twins while in college at New York Universities. The author is essential describing all of the endorsements and money making opportunities that are available to any student in college, except for college athletes. Article also draws a comparison between Manziel and South Carolina Defensive End, Jadeveon Clowney. Clowney would go onto become the first overall pick in the 2014 NFL draft. The article mainly focuses an autograph authentication firm that has supposedly validated numerous Clowney autographs, yet no sanctions have been imposed on him. Joe Orlando, who owns the authentication firm states that it is extremely rare that athletes do these singings and not get paid in some way for them. My one concern is that the article is slightly slanted towards defending Manziel, specifically. I want to use this source as a way to defend any athlete who is able to profit from their name.

This article does a good job of pointing out the inconsistencies that have occurred with different athlete allegations as well as making points about how other celebrity college students receive money for their own names. I plan to use this source to show that people have different ways of making money in college. While the vast majorities get jobs on or near campus, some are or become celebrities that can profit from their own name. The fact that actresses in school can sell their name while athletes who come from completely different backgrounds cannot is a disgrace. This article provides a nice piece of factual information about how athletes are held to a higher standard than other college students.

Advertisements

Blog 8

Explicit Vs. Implicit Argument

truck1

Fig 1A Fedex truck with explicit argument.

            In this advertisement, the delivery company Fedex is making an explicit argument. The first half of the truck is painted like a standard Fedex delivery truck with the text, “ALWAYS FIRST” printed on it. The back half of the truck is painted like a second truck from an unnamed delivery company. The words ALWAYS FIRST are making an explicit statement that Fedex is always first. The paint job of the truck is an attempt to demonstrate that Fedex is “leading” the unnamed delivery truck. The argument is explicit because the truck says exactly what the audience is supposed to take away from the advertisement, which is that Fedex will always be first, meaning you should choose them to deliver your packages.

 truck2

Fig 2. Fedex truck with an implicit argument.

            Figure 2 is an example of an implicit argument being made by Fedex Delivery Company. The truck itself does not have any text to suggest what the audience is supposed to think about the advertisement. However, it is being implied that Fedex is better than UPS because the Fedex truck is painted to look as though it is carrying UPS trucks. The truck does not specifically tell the people who see the truck what to feel or how they should react, but rather it allows the viewers to make their own assumptions about the companies based on the fact that one is “delivering” another one. The message must be interpreted by the viewers, meaning it is possible that people unfamiliar with either company would have little frame of reference on how to take the advertisement. This seems fairly unlikely, considering that Fedex and UPS are two of the most well-known delivery companies in the United States.

Blog 7

Investigation of Topics

I am a huge fan of sports and athletic competition. I find that I am drawn to many sports at several different levels. Of all sports, I get the most enjoyment out of college football. The level and ability of the teams are not important to me, as long is the game is exciting. With the new college football playoff, winning games against quality opponents is one of the most important aspects of criteria. But, sometimes the nation’s greatest current college football players are nowhere to be found in the big games.

A prime example of this season is running back Todd Gurley, from the University of Georgia. Gurley was suspended from four of the Bulldogs SEC games. The SEC is the power house conference in college football, and without its brightest stars, the games tend to lose their intrigue. Gurley was projected to be a finalist for the Heisman trophy, college football’s MVP award, and every play he was on the field was an action packed adrenaline rush, where anything could happen. But, Georgia had to do without Gurley for four games due to his recent suspension. What could this great athlete have done to hurt his team and his own personal image in such a way? Possibly violating the NCAA’s substance abuse policy like Tyrann Mathieu, who was forced to leave college football entirely and now starts for the Arizona Cardinals? Nope. Or maybe allegations of sexual assault and rape had surfaced like Florida State’s Heisman Trophy winning quarterback Jameis Winston. Wrong again. Todd Gurley was suspended for receiving money for signing autographs. Under NCAA rules, college athletes are prohibited from receiving money for their own namesake. This is a rule that is outdated and completely unreasonable, as well as causing college football to miss its biggest stars.

Blog 6

Columbus Day Arguement

I found that the most effective argument for me was the one made by theoatmeal.com. This particular argument was very informative with many hard facts, but presented them in a way that was easy to see and relate to. First, this argument addressed what everyone believed about Columbus and the common misconceptions that people naively follow without doing any research. The layout itself was easy to understand, and it would keep people reading, when they might have stopped after reading a more academic and traditional argument. The graphics used in the argument were extremely effective, painting a visual picture to lend to the argument that the text was making. The graphics made reading the text easier to get the message. The text itself was written in a way that was friendly to the reader. The author was writing like they were speaking directly to the audience instead of writing an argument about the topic. This argument also used sources that were very helpful to the argument. The most effective of which was a page from the personal journal of Columbus. Columbus described how he and his men treated the indigenous people, which was particularly cruel and downright terrible.

One of the other arguments the class looked at was also very strong, and had factual information that contributed to the argument. But, because this particular argument had limited graphics or images, and was in simple black and white text, came off as a little dry. The author may have reached even more people if they had made the argument more aesthetically pleasing. It is a little sad but true to say that more people are likely to read theoatmeal.com’s argument simply because it looks nicer than the standard text argument.

Another argument the class viewed was the Indigenous people’s video. This was a very compelling argument using real people to tell of the atrocities that were committed by Columbus and his men. Getting the opinion and feedback of real people strengthens the credibility of the argument. My only quandary with the video was that it did not immediately hook me into believing or watching the rest of the video. If I came across this video on my own, I most likely would not have watched the entire thing.