Comments
for Describing a Controversy
- nice to begin with
eyewitness testimony and then transition into how the majority of people
"witnessed" the attack.
- rhetorical questions
like "…so what do we do now?" position the audience to hear multiple positions
- very good to explicitly
admit that "appropriate response still remains a highly controversial issue…"
this kind of lets the audience off the hook a little and suggests that it
is ok for them to consider positions that they might not instinctively identified
with
- nice to contrast varying
positions by saying "many citizens feel…." and "others think…."
- Good to be explicit
about three categories: Doves, "middle group," and hawks. Might have come
up with a better moniker for middle group.
- After distinguishing
three groups, nice to say that they are all working for the same goal but
that they have different interpretations and values based on the idea of
justice.
- Good citations throughout
the speech
- Use of the DI column
is both good and bad. It’s ok if all positions will be based on student
voices but, since in this speech the Dove position is the only one discussed
through a student column, it makes – to this viewer - that position look
less attractive than the others.
- Some danger in presenting
Bush as the representative of the Hawk position since his position as the
president has a bit more ethos going for it than those occupying the other
two positions.
- Nice to point out
how "the positions are as varied as the nation itself"
- Very nice summative
comments
