Menu

Summary and Analysis Assignment Donna Woolfolk Cross’s Propaganda

March 16, 2019 0 Comment

Summary and Analysis Assignment
Donna Woolfolk Cross’s Propaganda: How Not to be Bamboozled
Summary of Cross’s Essay
In her essay, “Propaganda: How Not to be Bamboozled” presents to an opinion poll were taken tomorrow, people can be sure that nearly everyone would be against it because of sounds so bad. When we say, “Oh, that’s just propaganda,” it means, to most people. “That’s a pack of lies.” However when it comes for good or evil, propaganda has been a problem many years because Donna believes that people are bamboozled mainly because they don’t recognize propaganda when they see it. Most people misinterpret the true meaning of propaganda. Language and words are twisted and turned to produce propaganda. The following, then, and some common pitfalls for the unwary. Bad names have played a tremendously important role in the history of the world. The people who are victimized has ruined reputations and ended lives, sent people to prison and to war, and just generally made us mad at each other for centuries. Finally Cross states that glittering generalities are really name-calling in reverse. Name-calling uses words with bad connotations; glittering generalities are words with good connotation-“virtue words,” as the Institute for Propaganda Analysis has called them. Both name-calling and glittering generalities work by stirring our emotions in the hope that this wild cloud our thinking. Another approach that propaganda uses is to create a distraction, a “red herring,” that will make people forget or ignore the real issues. William Lutz by contrast, focused on the idea that propaganda is entirely bad. William Lutz focused on the language of propaganda, which in his opinion, is solely doublespeak. The irrelevancy of the plain-folks appeal is obvious: even if the man is “one of us” (which may not be true at all), that doesn’t mean that Senator Yakalot’s ideas and programs are sound-or even that he honestly has everyone best interests at heart. According to Cross, ” If we are to be led, let us not be lead blindly, but critically, intelligently, with our eyes open.” Cross addresses that we need to be informed in the correct way and not be misled.

Greg Lukianoff’s Twitter, Hate Speech, and the Costs of Keeping Quiet
Summary of Lukianoff’s Essay
According to Mr. Lukiainoff’s “Twitter, Hate Speech, and the Cost of Keeping Quiet”, He describe that people can use hate speech on Twitter which lead intro trouble. For Example, a couple of students from The Union of Jewish French Student sued Twitter for using an offensive word, #unbonjuif “a good jew”, Twitter did delete the tweets in January, however it was not enough because the students want to identified the users who posted an anti-Semitic message so that the users can be prosecuted under the French lawsuit against the hate speech. Twitter is resisting. It claims that as an American company protected by the First Amendment, it does not have to aid government efforts to control offensive speech. Internationally, America is considered radical for protecting speech that is highly offensive. But meanwhile in the U.S., Twitter should not be surprised to discover the ambivalence and even outright hostility toward its principled aversion to censorship, especially in that once great institution for the open exchange of ideas: American higher education, but who know? “Hate speech” is constitutionally protected in the United States. But the push against “hurtful” and “blasphemous” speech (primarily speech offensive to Islam) is gaining ground throughout the world. Last fall, for example, when many thought a YouTube video that satirized Mohammed caused a spontaneous attack on our consulate in Benghazi, academics across the country rushed to chide America for its expansive protections of speech. Also Lukianoff even explain that in order to be an effective mirror to the entire global society, Twitter thinks of itself primarily as a platform and does its best to get out of the way. Therefore, we know things we simply would not know otherwise — from the trivial to the serious. Lukianoff had taught us that hate speech can be very hatful, most people using hate speech rather it’s on Twitter, YouTube or Instagram. The only lasting fix to the real problem of racism or anti-Semitism is cultural.

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!


order now

Kiera Butler’s “The Creepy Language Tricks Taco Bell Uses to Fool People into Eating There”
Summary of Butler’s Essay
1) Purpose: Butler explains that all fast food can brainwash most people into buying blubbery burritos and lardy burgers. Of course, marketing and advertising are all about persuasion, but it’s not supernatural, No language, no matter how seductive and slick. Butler examines hundreds of menus and restaurant reviews and analyzes the language used about food. So her purpose was to showed people that fast foods can be very addicting and unhealthy, with Dan Jurafsky examines the food menus of one of America’s biggest fast food chains, Taco Bell’s use of language to the subtle differences-and the messages those subtle differences reveal about food, audience, and culture.

2) Assumptions: Butler explains her audience that Fast-food companies take a lot of flack for marketing to children with toys, ads, and special meals. But the kid-courting isn’t limited to restaurants. Butler also explains It’s also common for chains to partner with local schools on branded educational events and fundraisers. Take McDonald’s, which has mastered the art of the out-of-restaurant kids’ programs. Butler even told her audiences that a program called McTeacher’s Night (also known as McStaff Night), school staff work at their local McDonald’s for a few hours, and a portion of the sales made during the shift go to support their school. McDonald’s headquarters told her that it’s up to the individual restaurants to decide how much money the school takes home. According to this news story from the Morrow County Sentinel, during a recent McStaff Night in Cardington, Ohio, teachers from the Cardington-Lincoln Junior High School “conducted promotional type activities by greeting diners, offering samples, etc.”

Synthesis of Linda Flower, Anne Lamott and William Zinsser’s Essays
• Flower’s focus is on audience-the people for whom we write. She believes that writers must establish a cccommon ground)) between themselves and their readers, one that lessens their differences in knowledge, attitudes, and needs. Sometimes the reader may disagree, but if you share your knowledge and have a good attitude, the reader should respect your opinions and try to see things the way you do. I believe as a writer it is important to stay true to ourselves and our beliefs. The main purpose of writing is to communicate. Successful writers use their knowledge to grab the attention of the audience. They know how to have a good attitude when writing that helps the reader understand and connect with their work.
• This is usually the easiest difference to handle. When they a person has knowledge, we usually refer to his conscious awareness of explicit facts and clearly defined concepts. However, the most salient or powerful parts of my image, which strongly color my whole attitude toward lakes, are thoughts of cloudy skies, long rainy days, and feeling generally cold and damp.
• Lamott explains that no one is going to see it. If a kid wants to get into really sentimental, weepy, emotional territory, you let him. Just get it all down on paper because there may be something great in those six crazy pages that you would never have gotten to buy more rational, grown-up means. For example, he used to write food reviews for California magazine before it folded. Some readers took umbrage at my comparing mounds of vegetable puree with various ex-presidents’ brains. But because by then Lamott had been writing for so long, he would eventually let myself trust the process — sort of, more or less. I’d write a first draft that was maybe twice as long as it should be, with a self-indulgent and boring beginning, stupefying descriptions of the meal, lots of quotes from my black-humored friends that made them sound more like the Manson girls than food lovers, and no ending to speak of.
• Lamott also explains that practically even better news than that of short assignments is the idea of shitty first drafts. All good writers write them. This is how they end up with good second drafts and terrific third drafts. For her and most of the other writers she knows, writing is not rapturous. In fact, the only way she can get anything written at all is to write really, really shitty first drafts. Finally, Lamott would pick up my one-inch picture frame, stare into it as if for the answer, and every time the answer would come: all she had to do was to write a really shitty first draft of, say, the opening paragraph. And no one was going to see it.
• The writer must therefore constantly ask himself: What am I trying to say? Surprisingly often, he doesn’t know. Then he must look at what he has written and ask: Have I said it? Is it clear to someone encountering the subject for the first time? If it’s not, it is because some fuzz has worked its way into the machinery. The clear writer is a person clear-headed enough to see this stuff for what it is: fuzz.
• But the secret of good writing is to strip every sentence to its cleanest components. Every word that serves no function, every long word that could be a short word, every adverb that carries the same meaning that is already in the verb, every passive construction that leaves the reader unsure of who is doing what–these are the thousand and one adulterants that weaken the strength of a sentence.
Synthesis of Linda Flower, Anne Lamott and William Zinsser’s Essays
• Flower’s focus is on audience-the people for whom we write. She believes that writers must establish a cccommon ground)) between themselves and their readers, one that lessens their differences in knowledge, attitudes, and needs. Sometimes the reader may disagree, but if you share your knowledge and have a good attitude, the reader should respect your opinions and try to see things the way you do. I believe as a writer it is important to stay true to ourselves and our beliefs. The main purpose of writing is to communicate. Successful writers use their knowledge to grab the attention of the audience. They know how to have a good attitude when writing that helps the reader understand and connect with their work.
• This is usually the easiest difference to handle. When they a person has knowledge, we usually refer to his conscious awareness of explicit facts and clearly defined concepts. However, the most salient or powerful parts of my image, which strongly color my whole attitude toward lakes, are thoughts of cloudy skies, long rainy days, and feeling generally cold and damp.
• Lamott explains that no one is going to see it. If a kid wants to get into really sentimental, weepy, emotional territory, you let him. Just get it all down on paper because there may be something great in those six crazy pages that you would never have gotten to buy more rational, grown-up means. For example, he used to write food reviews for California magazine before it folded. Some readers took umbrage at my comparing mounds of vegetable puree with various ex-presidents’ brains. But because by then Lamott had been writing for so long, he would eventually let myself trust the process — sort of, more or less. I’d write a first draft that was maybe twice as long as it should be, with a self-indulgent and boring beginning, stupefying descriptions of the meal, lots of quotes from my black-humored friends that made them sound more like the Manson girls than food lovers, and no ending to speak of.
• Lamott also explains that practically even better news than that of short assignments is the idea of shitty first drafts. All good writers write them. This is how they end up with good second drafts and terrific third drafts. For her and most of the other writers she knows, writing is not rapturous. In fact, the only way she can get anything written at all is to write really, really shitty first drafts. Finally, Lamott would pick up my one-inch picture frame, stare into it as if for the answer, and every time the answer would come: all she had to do was to write a really shitty first draft of, say, the opening paragraph. And no one was going to see it.
• The writer must therefore constantly ask himself: What am I trying to say? Surprisingly often, he doesn’t know. Then he must look at what he has written and ask: Have I said it? Is it clear to someone encountering the subject for the first time? If it’s not, it is because some fuzz has worked its way into the machinery. The clear writer is a person clear-headed enough to see this stuff for what it is: fuzz.
• But the secret of good writing is to strip every sentence to its cleanest components. Every word that serves no function, every long word that could be a short word, every adverb that carries the same meaning that is already in the verb, every passive construction that leaves the reader unsure of who is doing what–these are the thousand and one adulterants that weaken the strength of a sentence.

x

Hi!
I'm Eddie!

Would you like to get a custom essay? How about receiving a customized one?

Check it out