Evaluation of Rhetorical Situations

PublicDomainPictures. "Stem Cell  Sphere  Three-Dimensional Shape  Division." 2013 via pixabay. CC0 Public Domain.

In this blog post, I will be evaluating the source talking about stem cell research.

The first source is from the News Medicine which tells you exactly what the controversy is. It is not ornately stated and is merely telling you both sides of the story how it is not only an ethical issue, but also a legal issue. Is the embryo really alive? This is also the issue involving abortions. If you have an abortion, are you really killing a living thing, or is the fetus not quite alive yet?

• The speaker is talking in a more informative tone. The author also goes on to talk about other controversies about the application of the stem cells such as cloning. The author, Dr. Ananya Mandal, MD, is a registered doctor and has had experience in the field and is knowledgable on the topic. But as being a doctor, she will be more willing to look at the benefits of the stem cell research because of the life saving potential they hold. 

• The audience in this case is a more general source because the language is not too hard to understand. It is said in simple terms and there is no need for further analysis or interpretation. 

• This article is much like a quick reference guide. It gives a summary of the issue in the beginning and continues to break down the controversies as the blog progresses. It starts with the initial problem of retrieving the sperm cells, then goes into the controversies of using the blogs. 

The next article I looked at was the stem cell information article of the UK research. It talks about both the controversies of the research but the benefits it promotes to the future of medicine. 

• The speaker is Ian Murnaghan. He has a bachelors of science with honors who specializes in stem cell research. He tells you about what stem cells are and then goes into the controversies. Then he goes on to talk about how to fix the problems that are holding back more of the stem cell research. He is obviously not a non-bias source because he is for the promotion of stem cell research. 

• The audience for this is a general source that do not need to know a lot about stem cells, but his goal seems to be to raise awareness of the issue and to persuade people to see the benefits of this research. 

• The context first introduces the topic by giving it a brief overview. He incorporated the involvement of the fetus more than the other controversial issues that involve the use of the stem cells. Once you get over removing the stem cells from the embryo, the challenges and debates are not as bad. He ends the article talking about the stem cell's great potential and that even though it might not happen soon, the benefits can be enormous. 

The final source I analyzed is from the National Institute of Health. There are multiple tabs about the stem cells and the controversies surrounding them. I honed in on the section involving potential uses of the stem cells and problems getting in the way of those research developments. 

• The author of the article is not particularly named, but it is coming from a reliable source.This is the US department of health and human services. They are promoting the research with stem cells but also identifying the challenges at hand. They are not completely unbiased.

• The audience is the general public that wants to know where the government is putting their money. It is informative to the general public but can be more helpful if you have an idea of the topic before jumping into the information. Also, you probably will be wanting information specifically on sperm cells if you manage to find this information. 

• The article uses sub titles so the information is better broken up and easier to read. There is a nice introduction along with the heading that will talk about what is in the article. It also includes hyperlinks that will give more information on specific topics that are not gone over in extent within this particular part of stem cells. There is even a visual given to further extend the knowledge of stem cells for the reader so have a better grasp on the topic. 

Reflection:

After reading Mira's blog post, I realize I could have done more background research on the author to see if there are any aspects of his life that may head to him arguing one side of the story over the other. You can infer from the articles which side the author takes, but learning more about him can help provide more information on the context of the article and more information on the author. 

I can also help include examples from the text in pertaining to the audience in why I feel the author is focusing in on a particular group of people. What makes me think that?

Namratha's blog post made me feel like I did a good amount of analyzing of the text. I am trying to work on not getting so wordy in my summaries, analysis's, and other summarizing writing, so I don't know if I would want to include a lot more information considering that the analysis can become too lengthy making it harder for me to reflect on later and others to read through. She did a good job at getting to the main idea and stating what was needed.