12.1: Body Paragraphs and the Rhetorical Analysis -- Reading

Now that you have learned more about the structure of a thesis statement and its role in an essay, it’s time to become more acquainted with the role of body paragraphs in an essay. This chapter will provide a general overview of body paragraphs that could be applied to any writing genre, while focusing on body paragraphs in a Rhetorical Analysis.

Remember from “Thesis Statements in a Rhetorical Analysis”:

Connect Back to Your Thesis Statement Throughout Your Paper: One important thing to keep in mind is that as you outline and draft the rest of your Rhetorical Analysis, the main points in your body paragraphs should connect back to your thesis statement. This helps keep your argument organized and clear.

You will need your Working Thesis Statement from your Assignment for the class-activity and assignment of this chapter and to make connections about body paragraphs.

What is a body paragraph?

Body paragraphs serve the support to your argument. They should connect back to your thesis statement, which is your argument. Body paragraphs should avoid introducing a new argument that is not already included in your thesis statement.

What are the parts to a body paragraph?

The basic structure to a body paragraph is the following:

· Topic sentence / Transition sentence from previous main point

· Support for your thesis statement (argument) / Analysis on main point

· Example that backs up your support

· Concluding statement/ Transition sentence to your next body paragraph or concluding paragraph

Each body paragraph should focus on one main point. This helps you organize your argument.

For example, if your thesis statement for your Rhetorical Analysis on the TED Talk video you chose is:

· Dr. Smith’s extensive career in medicine may give him the credibility for his audience to listen to him, but his argument lacks an emotional appeal to get his audience to care, since his focus is only on statistics.

Then you would want to make sure you focus on one main point in each body paragraph that connects back to your thesis statement. The focus of each body paragraph may look like this:

· Body Paragraph #1: Dr. Smith’s professional expertise hooks his audience, which means his audience is initially willing to listen to what he has to say.

· Body Paragraph #2: Dr. Smith uses ample research studies to support his point, but he relies too heavily on this tactic, which causes his audience to feel inundated with statistics.

· Body Paragraph #3: Dr. Smith missed an opportunity to appeal to his audience’s emotions, which means his audience is less likely to act on this issue

Each paragraph above will focus on one main issue.

Reading Context and Summary:

The following reading is a student sample paper of a Rhetorical Analysis. The student, Bethany Jensen, is conducting a rhetorical analysis on an article titled, “Why I Won’t Buy an iPad (and think you shouldn’t either) by Cory Doctorow that was initially published on the tech and gadget website, Boing Boing. Body paragraphs are numbered in this reading.

Rhetorical Analysis of Cory Doctorow’s “Why I won’t Buy an iPad (and Think You Shouldn’t, Either” By: Bethany Jensen Cory Doctorow’s article on Boing Boing is an older review of the iPad, one of Apple’s most famous products. At the time of this article, however, the iPad was simply the latest Apple product to hit the market and was not yet so popular. Doctorow’s entire career has been entrenched in and around technology. He got his start as a CD-ROM programmer and is now a successful blogger and author. He is currently the co-editor of the Boing Boing blog on which this article was posted. One of his main points in this article comes from Doctorow’s passionate advocacy of free digital media sharing. He argues that the iPad is just another way for established technology companies to control our technological freedom and creativity. In “Why I Won’t Buy an iPad (and Think You Shouldn’t, Either)” published on Boing Boing in April of 2010, Cory Doctorow successfully uses his experience with technology, facts about the company Apple, and appeals to consumer needs to convince potential iPad buyers that Apple and its products, specifically the iPad, limit the digital rights of those who use them by controlling and mainstreaming the content that can be used and created on the device. 1 The purpose of the article is to convince consumers that the iPad is not a worthwhile thing to buy because it has very limited uses outside of the set content, as well as technological problems and the potential to quickly become obsolete. Cory Doctorow wrote this article stating his negative opinion of the iPad in the wake of enormous media hype over the iPad’s release. Apple has proclaimed the iPad as a technological revolution, but Doctorow disagrees. He made this statement in response to Apple’s policies, exemplified by the iPad; “of course I believe in a market where competition can take place without bending my knee to a company that has erected a drawbridge between me and my customers!” (Doctorow, 2010). He is out to convince his audience they deserve the right to be responsible for their own media sharing and content. 2 One example of Doctorow’s position is his comparison of Apple’s App Store to WalMart. This is an appeal to the consumer’s logic—or an appeal to logos. Doctorow wants the reader to take his comparison and consider how an all-powerful corporation like Apple will affect them. An iPad will only allow for apps and programs purchased through the App Store to be run on it; therefore, a customer must not only purchase an iPad but also any programs he or she wishes to use. Customers cannot create their own programs or modify the hardware in any way. Doctorow (2010) has a very clear opinion of this: As an adult, I want to be able to choose whose stuff I buy and whom I trust to evaluate that stuff. I don’t want my universe of apps constrained to the stuff that the Cupertino Politburo decides to allow for its platform. 3 By referencing the constricting forces of communist Russia, the author appeals to his readers’ emotions and a basic human fear of being controlled. This is an appeal to pathos, and it stirs up a natural rebellion against being told what to do. Big corporations want consumers to believe that if they give up their creativity, their lives will be better. In that way, it is like WalMart. “Save money, live better,” just do not think outside of the box. 4 Doctorow appeals to logos again by quoting technology guru William Gibson’s comparison of iPad consumers to a mutant creature. The author also builds his character, an appeal to ethos, here by quoting a renowned expert, one who actually coined the term “virtual reality” (Doctorow, 2010). By referring to the specialist’s opinion, Doctorow is acknowledging his need for additional counsel. Doctorow reinforces his ethos by building on the solid foundation of an established technological leader. 5 Doctorow makes another appeal to logos in the form of showing potential iPad buyers what they could have instead of the dictated usage and expensive content that come with the iPad. He argues that consumers do not have to settle for limited digital rights, we have other options. Doctorow declares, “the reason people have stopped paying for a lot of ‘content’ isn’t just that they can get it for free, though: it’s that they can get lots of competing stuff for free, too” (2010). This is an example of how Doctorow uses reason and logic to make his point. He essentially says, “you could have this one thing…or you could have all of these things.” Why pay for an expensive iPad and monitored apps, when you can get equal or better products and programs for free? 6 The article “Why I Won’t Buy an iPad (and Think You Shouldn’t, Either)” does have a few flaws. One example of a weakness is Doctorow’s obvious bias against big corporations and digital rights management. He is a software creator, and so he has something personal to gain from free digital media sharing. He displays this bias by giving a rather one-sided argument. Doctorow says, “[Apple] uses DRM to control what can run on your devices, which means that Apple’s customers can’t take their ‘iContent’ with them to competing devices, and Apple developers can’t sell on their own terms” (2010). The problem is that not everyone can develop software, and, therefore, not everyone cares. The iPad could be a great piece of equipment with excellent applications for people who are not looking to develop and sell their own software. Just because the iPad does not work for Doctorow, does not mean it will not work for anyone else. 7 In addition to having an agenda, Doctorow does not mention any of the iPad’s positive qualities and abilities. Doctorow’s only positive mention of the iPad states “clearly there’s a lot of thoughtfulness and smarts that went into the design” (2010). In reality, the iPad has a lot of useful and innovative features, and it can do some incredible things; for example, nearly every big company has an app that represents it, and the internet browsing on the iPad is top notch. Doctorow could have built up his ethos argument by being a bit more fair-minded about the benefits of owning the iPad. Overall, Doctorow makes a good argument about why there are potentially many better things to drop a great deal of money on other than the iPad. He gives some valuable information and facts that consumers should take into consideration before going out to purchase the new device. He clearly uses rhetorical tools to help make his case, and, overall, he is effective as a writer, even if, ultimately, he was ineffective in convincing the world not to buy an iPad.

“Rhetorical Analysis of Cory Doctorow’s “Why I won’t Buy an iPad (and Think You Shouldn’t, Either” by Bethany Jensen, Excelsior Online Writing Lab (OWL), used under Creative Commons Attribution-4.0 International License.

Consider the above student sample:

Jensen’s thesis statement in the above paper is:

· In “Why I Won’t Buy an iPad (and Think You Shouldn’t, Either)” published on Boing Boing in April of 2010, Cory Doctorow successfully uses his experience with technology, facts about the company Apple, and appeals to consumer needs to convince potential iPad buyers that Apple and its products, specifically the iPad, limit the digital rights of those who use them by controlling and mainstreaming the content that can be used and created on the device.

Here are the main points in each of Jensen’s body paragraphs:

1	The author’s initial purpose: iPads are not worth it due to limited use and how quickly they become obsolete
2	Author’s appeal to logos by comparison example
3	Author’s appeal to pathos by bringing up a fear that readers may have
4	Author’s appeal to ethos by quoting an expert
5	Author’s appeal to logos by reason and logics
6	Flaws in author’s argument by showing author’s bias
7	Flaws in author’s argument by not showing a counterargument

While this student sample paper can still be improved during another round of revision, each body paragraph sticks to one main point. The student then uses examples to support that main point.