Questions About Controversy

Flickr.The Six Ws of Journalism and Police Investigations, August 14, 2008, Attribution 2.0 Generic

For project 3, I am going to continue with the debate regarding the legalization of marijuana, as I feel I am able to find information more easily on this topic than I can on my project 1 topic of Uber.

Who?

• Who is leading the charge for pro-legalization?
• Who is leading the charge for keeping it illegal?
• Who will benefit from the legalization of marijuana
• Who will be negatively affected by the legalization of marijuana?
• Who decides what the law is going to be?

What?

• What are the social and economical benefits of legal marijuana?
• What are the negative effects on society from legal marijuana?
• What do the current laws regarding marijuana do in the sense of bringing crime and violence into the country?
• What are the benefits of removing marijuana from the underground marketplace?
• What will our countries reputation look like if marijuana is made legal?

Where?

• Where is marijuana currently legal and how well does that work?
• Where can the U.S learn from other countries and be more successful regarding marijuana laws?
• Where is pro-legalization supported?
• Where and what cultures do not want to see it legalized?
• Where is the forefront of debate?

When?

• When was marijuana previously legal and when did that change?
• When will the majority of the U.S. support legalization in regards to the cultures of the different generations?
• When did marijuana begin to be decriminalized in the U.S.
• How did society function back when marijuana was legal?
• When can we expect change to better reflect the current culture of pro-legalization?

How?

• How is America being informed on the pros and cons of marijuana?
• How are uneducated claims allowed to be made public in the media?
• How do we get true and accurate information out to all of the U.S. to allow the citizens to make an informed decision for themselves?
• How is social media going to be effective in voicing the opinion of the masses?
• How do professional and scholarly sources view the legalization of marijuana?

Reflection on Project 2

Reflecting on my own revision process:

What was specifically revised from one draft to another?

• The biggest changes from my original draft to my final came in the form of a new introduction and conclusion. I revised them to be more concise and avoid unnecessary information. I also made sure all grammatical errors were removed.

How did you reconsider your thesis or organization?

• My thesis did not change throughout the revision process. I, along with my peers thought that my original thesis did a great job of summarizing the information and informing the reader what my essay was going to be about. That also applies to organization, I decided to keep my format the way it was and did not change the layout of my essay.

What led you to these changes?

• My peers, as well as assignments led me to make these revisions. If we were not required to peer-edit and complete the revision assignments, I may never have noticed the errors in my essay, and likely would have published a bad copy.

How do these changes affect your credibility as an author?

• Correcting the grammatical errors in my essay not only make it flow better, but also increases my credibility. An author who really knows how to write will make their information appear more credible and factual, which leads the audience to believe them more and be interested in what they are saying.

How will these changes better address the audience or venue?

• A majority of the changes I made were to sentence structure and word choice. I almost forgot I was writing for a business audience and began to use complex structure and big words that were unnecessary. I revised my paper to stay on course with business-style writing: short, concise, and to the point.

How did you reconsider sentence structure and style?

• By taking advice from my peers, I changed sentences around to make more sense and appear grammatically correct. A big help in this category was from the clarity topics in Rules for Writers.

How will these changes assist your audience in understanding your purpose?

• My audience is geared toward business students who focus on short, informative pieces. My revisions to create smaller, more concise sentence structures will assist my audience in better understanding the topic at hand, as that is how they are taught and know how to read and write. More clear sentences = better understanding.

Did you have to reconsider the conventions of the particular genre in which you were writing?

• I did not have to reconsider the conventions of a standard essay, as I am very familiar with how they work. The only thing I had to change was being less persuasive, and more informative.

How does the process of reflection help you consider your identity as a writer?

• Revision and reflection help point out the flaws in my writing and what I can do better to further my credibility as a writer. It makes me realize that my writing is not perfect like I may think the first draft is, and that I need to be more thorough in my revisions to create the best essay possible.

Wikimedia Commons. Thinking Man, November 24, 2007, Creative Commons Attribution Share-Alike 4.0 International

Clarity, Part 2

Wikimedia Commons. Clarity-Zedd, October 31, 2014, Public Domain

Find the exact words:

I learned that searching through a thesaurus in order to find new ways to state something may not always be the best option. In high school we were taught to provide as much variety as we could in our sentences, but sometimes you end up with a word that does not exactly express your meaning. I realized that trying to get fancy with big words can completely change the meaning of your sentence if the chosen word does not mean the same as a simpler, more commonly used word. In my essay I wrote, "All these examples summate Dighe’s argument as to why marijuana should be legalized in the U.S...." I realized that summate does not directly fit the context of the sentence, and changed it to "bring together."

Tighten wordy sentences:

While reading this section, the most important thing I learned was about inflated phrases. I am guilty of using inflated phrases to add bulk to sentences sometime, and I realized that it isn't always necessary. The point can be made clear with one or two words rather than a short phrase, and that is what business writers need to do. I will definitely implement this in my writing from now on. In my essay I wrote, "we will take a look at his background and credentials, and how he explains the issue while also appealing to the values and beliefs of his audience." I decided to change "take a look" to just "look" because it implies the same thing while tightening the sentence structure.

Choose appropriate language:

Another error I realized I was making was puffing up sentences to impress readers, which therefore less informs them. You can do a much better job of informing if you just state the facts rather than use fancier words that take away from the true idea. I took the most from the section regarding the use of gender-neutral terms such as firefighter instead of fireman. Before reading this section, I would have never even thought of that being sexist, as the book suggests.

Prefer active verbs:

From reading this section I learned that the use of active verbs make your essay more vigorous and colorful. They express more meaning than passive verbs and place more emphasis on the point I am trying to make. I also learned that I used be verbs more than I should, and how to effectively replace them to make my sentences less dull.

Revised Conclusion

My peer's comments suggested that my conclusion was strong the way it was, and I agreed with them. However, in order to receive a fresh take and possible better my essay, I rewrote it in a different way. I changed sentences around and varied my vocabulary to hopefully make my new conclusion superior to my original. As I stated in my last blog post, I would appreciate an instructor's take on both of these paragraphs to help me choose the most suitable one.

Revised Introduction:

         

           With an elaborate and clever use of rhetorical strategies, Dighe's article is able to appeal to his audience's values and beliefs, while not veering from his focus on why marijuana should be legalized. The author appeals to older generations by not insulting their beliefs that marijuana is harmful and illegal, but effectively conveys his claims without forcing an opinion on his audience. Dighe's article outlines the economic net benefits of marijuana legalization in a manner that outweighs the net negative benefits. He provides personal stories, factual claims, and credible information in order to appeal to ethos, pathos and logos. He does this while sneakily persuading his audience by his easy-going tone and concise method of presenting his information.

Original Conclusion:

Dighe’s extensive use of rhetorical strategies throughout his article appeal to his audience’s values and beliefs, while maintaining a focus on his pro legalization argument. While still adhering to cultural values of older generations where marijuana was looked down upon by not forcing an opinion on his readers, Dighe’s article outlines the economic net benefits of marijuana legalization while showing readers that they outweigh the net negative benefits. He provides personal stories, factual claims, and credible information in a non-argumentative way, while sneakily persuading his audience by his conversation-like tone and “cut to the chase” business-style writing.

Pixabay. Change, July 2012, CC0 Public Domain

Revised Introduction

Business writing is supposed to be clear cut and to the point. I slimmed down my introduction to remove information that is not essential to my essay to make my introduction easier to read and more concise. While I am not 100% it is necessarily superior than my old introduction, I would enjoy someone else's opinion on it. Perhaps an instructor? Down below you can review my revised paragraph as well as my original.

Revised Introduction:

          Legalizing marijuana in the United States is a topic that many have voiced their opinion on in the past decade. Over the course of the past few years, advances have been made and marijuana has became legal in several states, including Colorado and Washington. The question now is whether or not the legalization of marijuana will benefit or be detrimental to the U.S. Economists deal in the sector of determining if the net benefits of a certain action outweigh the net negative benefits. One of those economists, Ranjit Dighe, provides readers with ideas and examples supporting his pro position on the legalization of marijuana in the U.S. He appeals to his audience's values and beliefs, while retaining his own personal bias in order to let the reader decide for themselves whether or not they think believe marijuana should be legalized.

Original Introduction:

The debate of whether or not the legalization of marijuana in the United States would benefit the country or harm it, has been floating around for many decades. In the past half decade, it has come into the forefront of debate, with several states such as Colorado and Washington legalizing the recreational use of marijuana. Many economists along with the general public now question whether or not this is a good idea. They’re debating if it should be rolled out across the country, or if it is going to be detrimental to the U.S. As a result of this, many experts and journalists alike have taken their side of the debate to the media by voicing their opinions on the issue. An example of this is an article from the Huffington Post. In his article, "Legalize It -- The Economic Argument," Ranjit Dighe provides readers with ideas and examples supporting his pro position on the legalization of marijuana in the U.S. He appeals to his audience's values and beliefs, while retaining his own personal bias in order to let the reader decide for themselves whether or not they think believe marijuana should be legalized.

Wikimedia Commons. Change, May 17, 2005, Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Generic

Reflection on Project 2 Draft

To start, I reviewed Mark and Brandon's projects.

1. Who is my audience?

- This essay was focused toward business students who have an interest in economics. The paper was written as an example rhetorical analysis on a business article in a method that business students will learn to write in college.

2. What biases might my readers have? Am i respecting their opinions while also achieving my own purpose?

- In my essay, I stayed as unbiased as possible. I stated the facts from the author, and analyzed why and how he was getting his selected information across. My author's bias was that marijuana should be legalized, but my essay allows my readers to decide for themselves.

3. What are their values and expectations? Am I adequately meeting those expectations?

- Business students value short and concise articles. They are taught to get their point across in as few words as possible. I feel that I met this expectation by providing just the right amount of information without being overbearing or not adequate enough to understand the topic at hand.

4. How much information do I need to give my audience? How much background information or context should I provide for them without insulting their expertise?

- As I previously stated, a student in the business field does not need loads of information. However, not all students would be familiar with the topic of marijuana legalization so I provided adequate information that give the perfect amount of background information for the reader to make an informed decision for themselves whether or not they believe marijuana should be legalized.

5. What kind of language is suitable for this audience?

- Business papers are not too technical and do not include substantial quantities of large, complex words. An easy to read, approachable language that anyone could follow, not just business majors, is suitable for this audience, and I feel that I stuck to that well for the most part.

6. What tone should I use with my audience? Do I use this tone consistently throughout my draft?

- My goal was to maintain a formal and informative tone. The general bulk of my essay maintains this format, however, I have noticed a few sentences that undermine that goal and need to be re-worded to appeal to my desired tone better.

Flickr. Hand with Reflecting Sphere, June 18, 2005, Attribution Non-Commercial-ShareAlike 2.0 Generic

Clarity, Part 1

In reading the Clarity section of Rules for Writers, I focused on four topics, those being: Add needed words, Emphasize key ideas, Provide some variety, and Eliminate distracting shifts.

Add Needed Words:

I often find myself omitting words because I feel that my sentences can become too wordy, or repeat themselves. After reading the Clarity section on adding needed words, I learned that omitting certain words can lead a sentence to defy grammar, and even recognized that I do this in some of my writings. This knowledge will help me make sure my sentences are logical, while also not becoming too wordy.

Emphasize Key Ideas:

The section in emphasizing key ideas that stood out to me the most was "Excessive subordination." When I am trying to strongly emphasize something, I often add words to create length as I believe this makes the reader focus more on the sentence. I learned that this is not always the case and that you have to be careful to not overdue it.

Provide Some Variety:

A huge problem of mine is that I am bad at wording similar sentences differently. I often find myself using the same sentence openings that are easily picked up by then reader. This section has opened my mind on ways to include some variety as well as changing up the sentence structure of my writings.

Eliminate Distracting Shifts:

Another problem of mine when I write is I can change verb tense and the point of view without noticing it. This makes the writing's tense confusing and can take away from the message being delivered. I need to choose a suitable perspective and then stay with it, as the book states.

Pixabay. Climber & Clarity, October, 2014, CC0 Public Domain