The
Facebook Dilemma: RHETORICAL ANALYSIS
Transcript https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/film/facebook-dilemma/transcript/ (Links
to an external site.)
20 Points
Write a 3-4 page
double-spaced essay (minimum two outside sources) rhetorical analysis of PBS
Frontline’s 2018 documentary The Facebook Dilemma in
which you identify its claims, the type of claim (fact, value, policy) discuss
the types of evidence used to support those claims, and determine whether the
argument is persuasive or not.
It is not enough to
restate the argument. You must break the argument apart and evaluate the
methods of persuasion employed by the filmmakers. Discuss the validity of the
facts, statistics, and interviews that Frontline uses in the
film.
This paper must be
formally documented in either MLA or APA style. It requires a Works Cited
or Reference page with a minimum of two outside sources. Sources should
be from reputable media…no Wikipedia or encyclopedic sources should be part
of the Works Cited page. (You may consult Wikipedia/IMDB for context,
but do not cite them in your essay.) As always, your work will be run
through turnitin software, so be sure that no incidences of
plagiarism occur—either intentional or unintentional.
The paper must be
logically organized, must maintain a consistent position, and must be free of
grammatical error. The essay will be graded on the strength of your
argument, on your prose style and on the quality of your content.
A sample rhetorical
analysis is attached to the file folder.
METHODS OF ORGANIZATION
Option A: Toulmin model
Introduction: Identify
the claim, type of claim. List (briefly) the types of evidence employed
to persuade. Identify who the audience the film is trying to reach.
Include a thesis statement that tells reader if the argument is reasonable,
well-supported, and persuasive.
Body:
1. Devote
a section to discussing the factual evidence presented in the documentary. Is
it persuasive? Is it accurate? Is it biased or is it neutral?
Have the filmmakers been biased in the evidence selected? Is there
evidence of screening or slanting? This might be a good place to include
outside research—competing or corroborating studies/reviews of the factual
content of the documentary.
2. Devote
a section to discussing the emotional appeals of the documentary: are they
moving? are they well-chosen? who is the intended audience? how do the
filmmakers establish credibility? (This might be a good place to add research
about the producers or reporters themselves.)
3. Devote
a section to discussing the underlying assumptions in the piece. Are there any
logical fallacies in the argument? Do the filmmakers step on any toes
with those assumptions?
Conclusion:
Restate the main points
you make about the argument in new words. Then discuss the effect that
the documentary had on your own perceptions about the so-called Facebook
Dilemma.
Option B: Aristotelian
Model
Introduction: Identify
the claim, type of claim. Identify the audience that the filmmakers try
to reach. Give an overview of your rhetorical analysis’ content: How do
the filmmakers employ ethos, logos, and pathos? Include a thesis
statement that tells readers if the argument is reasonable, well-supported, and
persuasive.
Body:
Your organization should
be structured on the ethos, logos, and pathos model. You may want to do a
couple of paragraphs in one area and only one in another—but use the structure
roughly as an organizing tool for different sections of the paper. A
detailed description of what those sections should consider is listed below.
1. Ethos:
explain in greater detail the ethos appeal of the Facebook Dilemma.
How do the filmmakers establish credibility? (This might be a good place for
outside research about the producers or writers themselves.) How do they
appeal to the audiences’ ethos?
2. Logos:
discuss the factual evidence used and conclusions the experts reach to build
their argument. Is the evidence overly selective? This is also the place
that you would identify and discuss any logical fallacies or faulty logic.
(This might be a good place to include outside
research—corroborating or competing studies/reviews of the factual content of
the documentary.)
3. Pathos:
discuss the emotional appeals used to sway the audience: the framing devices
(e.g. “gotcha” interview questions, moments of outrage) and their impact on the
viewer. Are the positions representative of all Americans? Do these
interview subjects motivate viewers to accept the filmmakers’ argument?
Conclusion:
Restate the main points
you make about the argument in new words. Then discuss the effect that
the documentary had on your own perceptions about the so-called Facebook
dilemma.
