This week in class we read a chapter of our text entitled "So What? Who Cares?", dicsussing how we address all audiences on topics that may or may not be of interest to them, and how we make an issue rise to importance. Oftentimes, you may make an argument to an audience that is saying to themselves, "why should I care about this?" This is a challenge of rhetoric, and writers use many tools to convince audiences that their topic and argument are valid.
Please read the following op-ed entitled "Global Weirding is Here" by Thomas Freidman. The topic is global climate change, and the debate over whether it exists or not. Some people think that this is a topic that has been overrated, and are asking "so what"?
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/17/opinion/17friedman.html?em
Then, write a response in which you address the following concerning the article:
1) Who is the audience?
2) What is the topic?
3) What stategies does Friedman use to convince the audience that his topic is important?
(Hint: Appeals/rhetorical devices)
4) Are you personally interested in this topic? why or why not?
5) What information would a writer need to provide to convince a skeptical audience that this topic is important?
6) What do you think Friedman's purpose, or objective is?
7) In your opnion, does he do a good job addressing "so what" and "who cares" or would you do it differently?
