Joggers or Runners?

1. My initial reaction of the website reading was that I was kind of intrigued. I never really thought of the human race as “runners”. Also, the idea that running is wild definitely stood out to me.

2. I run probably three to four times a week. After reading the article though it made me feel weak and that I don’t work hard enough because the comparisons the writers were using (the idea that our ancestors ran for their survival) was very strong.

3. I found that the use of black and white images definitely tied in with the point of the article: that a person is either a runner or a person is not. In other words, the answer is black or white, one or the other. Also, I really liked how at the end of chapter two the last page stated in bold text “run like an animal”. It was very inspirational and to the point. The significance of these elements and the message that they are working with easily persuades the reader in an easy, clear way.

4. Values that are promoted in the ad are physical activity. One obvious result of running like an animal is health and good fitness.

5. In the article, Pearl Izumi alienates the jogger by criticizing him. However, I think the main motive behind that is to inspire joggers to become runners and “save the population”. Considering myself a jogger, I was more inspired than offended. With that, I see large marketing advantages.

6. Logos came off as the strongest rhetorical appeal in the ad. All of the information condensed into a paragraph form instantly made me think that it had to contain facts and logic in order to back up the main question of “ever notice how it’s always runners who find dead bodies?”. Also, the technique of comparing where joggers are found jogging and where runners are found running had to of had some kind of brainstorming behind it.

7. I would choose the Reebok ad to appear in a magazine because it’s more visually appealing and does not require much reading for the viewer. If you think about it, what average person flipping through magazines stops to read a detailed ad such as Pearl Izumi’s? I can also see Izumi’s ad offending people or confusing them from using such a touchy subject (dead bodies) to get his point across. The Reebok ad makes sense and I think more people could relate to it, meaning the feeling of throwing up. How many people really come across dead bodies when they go for a run anyway?

Army America

1. After reading the assigned texts and viewing the provided websites, I found that there are several kinds of rhetoric found on both links. They both have tons of visual rhetoric. The first website’s use of bold, powerful text along with serious black and white photos of soldiers clearly sends out the message that the military will make you a stronger, more respected person. I instantly got a feeling that I was in the presence of authority when I was browsing through it. The site’s homepage is also very professional looking and is credited very well with army symbols and newsfeed. Also, in the media section, the creators of the site are trying their best to suck viewers in by all of the different images they have displayed of the video game along with inspirational video clips of real soldiers. The second website’s trailer uses a lot of testimonials of real people who explain how the game content relates to life. The people interviewed basically use their own voiced opinions and suggest pros about the benefits of having an army gaming event to persuade viewers.

2. Obviously the intended audience is mostly young teens. In some of the video clips, higher ups even stated that “it is a great way to get young people to come out”. I feel that these messages have a strong influence over youthful boys aspiring to be part of manhood.

3. To an extent, I do agree with what Navy veteran Boyle has to say about the website and game. I believe that any military branch is a great organization to be a part of, but at the same time I feel one has to join for the right reasons. A video game can only compare so much to real life, and if one joins the military because of it there is chance they could be blindsided by the realities of war if they are not stable enough for it. For instance, the realities that the media portrays concerning the war in Iraq are scary and saddening. It buds fear in many American citizens. With that, the game/event can indoctrinate the ideology of war. If one decides to go to a gaming event with an already previous interest in joining, then I don’t see a problem with that. However, when recruiters try to persuade an ignorant teen that playing a videogame is just like being in the real army, I think it is unethical.

4. I do not feel that the websites encourage teens to become violent. They are both created in very professional, respectable ways. Even so, I am not a fan of extremely violent video games. I find them nauseating and they make me uncomfortable. If I had children I would definitely want to review what they are playing.