In this video, Vox argues that Marvel's film, Black Panther, can attribute its success to the inclusion of minority groups who make up a large part of society, but not cinema. The first appeal for the argument is logic; data shows that demographics-wise, America is almost equal in gender and about 38% minority, whereas many superheroes are white males. Black Panther centers around a mostly black men and women who play powerful characters, this differentiation from other popular films explains the excitement. From here, the conversation switches from why Black Panther has been surrounded with so much hype to why casts tend to exclude minorities and women in major roles. According to Vox "1 out of every 10 major films are directed by minorities, a similar percent... cast in lead roles, and even fewer... written by minorities," another appeal to logic. This general consensus in media makes it difficult for minorities to climb in the ranks of film. Darnell Hunt, a social sciences professor from UCLA (who appeals to ethics), even calls people who ultimately create the pool of actors and cast movies "gatekeepers" because of the role they play in who audiences see. Since many minorities and women are not gatekeepers, changes appear in their journey to the screen.
Films like Black Panther, which center minorities, are appearing more now than ever because the numbers for minority populations are increasing. With more people of color comes a higher demand for representation in media, and the film industry. This is the appeal to emotion, these films target young people as their audience, and this gives an air of importance in showing kids that they can be like the heroes they see in film. Vox constructs a valid and relevant argument by using a current and popular film. The large hype surrounding the film and Hunts, analysis add strong ethical appeals. The use of statistics gives their points a concrete foundation to stand on, and talk of future generations makes viewers think that films with minorities in major roles matter. All of these combined make for an effective argument that can impact those who decide to listen. If you wouldd like to see the actual discussion from Vox, you can find the official video here:
0 Comments
This video from Vox explores BMI and why it is not an accurate measure of health, mainly logos is used to support the author's stance. Right off the bat the reoprter, Gina Barton, compares her two assistants, Coleman and Phil. Both have similar heights and weight, and as a result, virtually the BMI, but internally they have different percentages of fat and muscle, with Phil having more body fat and Coleman having more muscle. This introduction is the first logical appeal, causing the audience to wonder: "Why is it that this flawed measure is used to detect serious diseases, like diabetes?," and this question lingers until the end of the video. A professor at George Washington University, Todd Miller, is used to appeal to credibility. Miller is a professor, making his information on the formula BMI feel just that much more meaningful. He states that BMI is "the body weight in kilograms, divided by height in square meters" and gives his own reason for the problem with BMI. Specifically for those with lots of muscle, a marker of physical fitness. Here Barton uses the athlete, Marshawn Lynch. Following the formula, Lynch's BMI is 30.0, the exact number needed to be considered obese, however Lynch is not obese, he is very muscular. This the second logical appeal. Barton then proceeds to explain the history of BMI, it was originally made to study the "common man", but later shifted to obesity. She even tells that there are other ways to measure health by fat and muscle, but presumptuously they aren't used because BMI is a fast, cheap, and generally correct measurement option. Emotionally, the information about how many athletes have a high BMI is shocking an proves just how unreliable it can be. Ultimately, Barton develops her argument well with examples from a credible source and math to show the fragility of this measurement.
The link can be found here:
This video discusses rape and tries to convince the viewers that the elbow shown in TIME's people of the year magazine represents those who feel that they cannot come forward. The video mainly uses logos and pathos to support the argument.
Logically, there are statistics used to backup their claims, "For every 1,000 rapes, only 310 are reported...It's believed [rape is] the most under reported crime." They reporter continues to say that even from that number only a small fraction is incarcerated, which explains why so few come forward about rape. This would give TIME a the ability to symbolize those who are afraid of retaliation for coming forward on the front cover with those who spoke out during 2017. He says that they experiences tend to be limited to mostly straight, white women and suggests that even those who came forward are "just the tip of the elbow" compare to how many people are affected by rape and sexual harassment. In pathos, this video appeals to one's emotions through word emphasis and pauses and shifts in music. When the speaker speaks about the fractions breaking down how many reported rapists are imprisoned, he puts emphasis on "and only a fraction of that", each time lengthening the words. This is also seen when the author talks about the elbow, saying that "most don't or can't" come forward, suggesting that fear is not that only reason rape is not reported. Another way to emphasize the emotions is music. The beginning of the video, discusses those who came forward and this is accompanied by plaintive synthesizer music that feels nice to hear. When the speaker mentions how those harassed at work's least common response is to formally report, the music fades to nothing. When it returns, the change in mood comes with dissonant vibraphone music to elevate the severity of the topic. Ethos is the least focused on part of the video, but the author does maintain credibility by including sources that use facts and statistics to back up his claim. Using these appeals and an interesting video format, the reporter keeps the listener attentive as he gives insight into a serious topic. Vox highlights the progress that is to be made in the future of reporting and informs. The evidence is very effective in conveying why the author believes that the elbow represents those who have not spoken.
Vox appeals mainly to pathos in this article about why some audience members of the movie "Coco" dislike the opening short. The strong title is the first indicator of an appeal to pathos, the use of the word "hate" makes the topic seem more severe than it actually is. The article appeals to credibility by including Tweets, a means to show a "popular opinion" and identify the people mentioned in the title. The appeal to logos is the explanation of why Disney allowed this 21-minute long short to be included in their production. Vox explains that ever since Disney and Pixar were paired together, Pixar has made content that is more marketable to supply to the demands of Disney. In this case, they created this to bridge a gap for a future Frozen movie. They also include the fact that the short was removed entirely in Mexican viewings to show how much consumers hate the Frozen short.
Find the article here:
https://www.vox.com/culture/2017/11/25/16697898/coco-short-olafs-frozen-adventure-hate-pixar
Vox's video from October 17th explores the history that has lead to the mistreatment of Haitians and the stark economic differences on the two halves of Hispaniola. The video follows a journalist who goes to Haiti to see the the differences in person. The fact that the journalist, Johnny, goes in person to Haiti to see what life is like for merchants aids his credibility by going beyond statistics. The video appeals to logos by using statistics to put the disparities in perspective. For example, "If you're born in Haiti, then you're 2.5 times more likely to die as a baby." Information like this makes the audience have a very concrete idea of the differences across the border. The use of history of how the French exploited the land and enslaved people of Haiti also appeals to ethos. The racism that explains how Dominicans treated Haitians appeals to our sense of morals as racism is morally wrong. This all appeals to ethos as we don't like how badly things have turned out for Haiti. Overall these give information into what Haiti's situation is in comparison to the Dominican Republic is and how it came about. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4WvKeYuwifc Use this link to see the video for yourself.
Vox creator Estelle Caswell appeals mainly to credibility and logic to claim that more songs should continue to use the fade out instead of letting it die out. Caswell features information from writer Bill Weir and Berklee professor Susan Rogers to explain the origins and inner workings of the fade out. The fade out originated in 1918 with Gustav Holst's the Planets. The final movement, Neptune, originally ended by someone slowly closing the door on the choir. This effect later grew in popularity with the evolution of sound recording and radio music. Studies have shown that this effect in pop music makes listeners want to tap along to the song eve after it's ending, aiding in giving it closure and letting it "live" after its ending. There isn't much that seems to specifically appeal to pathos, but the intonation of the speaker's voice and the inclusions of familiar music and fun background music keeps the video interesting. With these points, Estelle supports her claim well, convincing the audience that the fade should stay in pop. Caswell presents the argument admirably, and her point resonates well, almost like a fade out.
|
AuthorMy name is Kobe Lester, and I want to see what makes Vox news appealing. Tell me any points that you have and I will look for them in other videos by Vox news. Archives
February 2018
Categories |