politcal mailers

ESSAY PROMPT We’ve practiced rhetorical analysis by examining a set of political mailers for the upcoming election. For Essay 3, you will continue that work, but this time, you will use what you’ve learned about rhetoric to analyze a film. The film, San Francisco 2.0, definitely garnered some attention when it was released in 2015. Some praised it as “clear eyed ” while others called it “dishonest”. I want you to watch the film, specifically looking for examples of Director Alexandra Pelosi’s appeals to ethos, pathos, and logos (including logical fallacies). Examining her rhetoric will give us some insight into her craft as a documentary filmmaker and how she aims to persuade. For Essay 3, you will perform a rhetorical analysis on San Francisco 2.0. Focus your analysis on the following question: Is this film an effective piece of rhetoric? In other words, how well does Pelosi appeal to her audience with ethos, pathos, and logos (and avoid logical fallacies) in her film? REQUIREMENTS The essay must respond to the above prompt and include: – A unified thesis about Pelosi’s rhetorical choices. – Topic sentences that use the rhetorical terms (introduced in Week 8) to make a point about her rhetorical choices. – Textual evidence (quote, paraphrase, or description of images) from the film. Be specific! – A reference to either the Re-Code interview (Links to an external site.) and/or Shaw’s critique (Links to an external site.) (see links to articles) – Formatted in MLA style, including MLA citations and a Works Cited page TIPS FOR SUCCESS Make sure your thesis is about Pelosi’s RHETORICAL STRATEGIES and NOT about the issue of how the tech economy has changed San Francisco. Use the rhetorical terms! The terms are your friends! “clear eyed ” https://www.vox.com/2015/9/27/11618910/alexandra-pelosis-new-hbo-documentary-isnt-the-anti-tech-movie-you “dishonest” https://beyondchron.org/hbos-dishonest-account-of-san-francisco/ FILM : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IMPHPac8vuw