Probe Post

Sarah Sanders:

Sarah appeals a lot to ethos, some logos but very little of pathos. She displays a lot of ethos as she is already someone who works in the political field. Not only that but she talks very professionally and  she remains calms. She doesn't get caught up in some sort of an emotional uproar, so that means she doesn't display any pathos attributes. She doesn't display much logos either because she only states evidence SHE believes are facts, twisting them and putting a spin on them.

Tomi Lahren:

Tomi presents a strong pathos. She is clearly more emotional, upset, than Sanders. She even uses the fact that our "hard working" money was being used on the probe to get the audience to become angry like her. She is very opinionated and her argument was very informal so her ethos was weak.

Mark Mazzetti:

Mark however shows little to no pathos. He talks in a way where you wont be able to determine what his political stance is. He displays logos by bringing up where this has all started, George Papadoulous.

Matt Apuzzo

Matt is very straightforward. Just like part he doesn't show much pathos. He quotes a veteran, which shows logos. And he shows ethos when he presents facts he got from leaked emails, making him more credible.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Introduction to "Tattoos by Design"

Why I'm Choosing to Argue About Tattoos

Peer Reviews For Presentations