The first review is on the BBC article How Trump abortion funding cuts could affect Africa by Anne Soy, a BBC Africa health correspondent.
In this article, the author creates sympathetic diction to appeal to pathos in the reader/audience. This is done by using strong words such as “fundamental rights” to persuade the reader into believing that the policy that trump signed off is wrong and affects all people. The author seems to have some sort of emotional attachment as the article seems to favor one side of the argument more than the other, which is supporting pro-choice. However, this vocabulary that the authors is utilizing reveals a more professional tone which also appeals to ethos, as it gives the reader a sense of respect towards the author as if she knows what she is talking about.
The author also creates an appeal to ethos by quoting credible sources for information on the effects of the policy that trump signed off on. This same quote appeals to pathos, however, since it talks about the possible negative effects it will have on poor lesser developed African countries that need the support of this program to help the prevention of diseases such as malaria, and to also prevent unwanted pregnancies. The author also creates appeals to logos by providing statistical information on the losses that will come to fruition due to the policy, such as the “$100m (£80m) in US funding meant for sexual and reproductive health services for millions of women and girls who would otherwise go without these vital services as it refuses to abide by the gag rules” (Soy 46-49) that the IPPF will lose in its regional office in Africa.
The author’s purpose for this article is to inform people on the policy that trump approved as well as to show one side of the argument on the effects that will inevitably develop from the passing of this policy. It does not seem that the author is trying to create an argument, but rather to inform people by using information from already-established arguments on the subject. Evidence used throughout the article however includes statistics on many effects of this policy on international planned parenthood organizations which receive funding from the U.S. and how the absence of these programs will increase maternal mortality rates. For example, one statistic reveals that approximately %13 of maternal mortality is caused by unexpected pregnancies.
The article is weak in the end where it constantly lists of stats of the projected effects or proven statistics on the negatives of the absence of these planned parenthood organizations, which can get very tedious for readers when that is all the author writes about. The author also concluded the article with a quote, which did not seem like a very strong conclusion for such a controversial article as it just restates the cause that one of the planned parenthood organizations is fighting for.
The author also creates an appeal to ethos by quoting credible sources for information on the effects of the policy that trump signed off on. This same quote appeals to pathos, however, since it talks about the possible negative effects it will have on poor lesser developed African countries that need the support of this program to help the prevention of diseases such as malaria, and to also prevent unwanted pregnancies. The author also creates appeals to logos by providing statistical information on the losses that will come to fruition due to the policy, such as the “$100m (£80m) in US funding meant for sexual and reproductive health services for millions of women and girls who would otherwise go without these vital services as it refuses to abide by the gag rules” (Soy 46-49) that the IPPF will lose in its regional office in Africa.
The author’s purpose for this article is to inform people on the policy that trump approved as well as to show one side of the argument on the effects that will inevitably develop from the passing of this policy. It does not seem that the author is trying to create an argument, but rather to inform people by using information from already-established arguments on the subject. Evidence used throughout the article however includes statistics on many effects of this policy on international planned parenthood organizations which receive funding from the U.S. and how the absence of these programs will increase maternal mortality rates. For example, one statistic reveals that approximately %13 of maternal mortality is caused by unexpected pregnancies.
The article is weak in the end where it constantly lists of stats of the projected effects or proven statistics on the negatives of the absence of these planned parenthood organizations, which can get very tedious for readers when that is all the author writes about. The author also concluded the article with a quote, which did not seem like a very strong conclusion for such a controversial article as it just restates the cause that one of the planned parenthood organizations is fighting for.
Soy, Anne. "How Trump Abortion Funding Cuts Could Affect Africa." BBC News. BBC, 28 Jan. 2017. Web. 12 May 2017. <http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-38768901>.