The article, "Say Goodbye to The Blob. Google's New Emoji have arrived" is written by Elizabeth Stinson. It was published on September 1st 2017. The article was written in response to the anticipated wait for the redesigned google emojis. The writer uses a very cheerful and delighted tone due to the positive change to the emojis and mainly appeals to ethos to increase her credibility. She also uses high diction to make sure that what she is saying comes across clearly.
The author uses a very positive tone throughout the article. It shows that she is clearly happy that Google has ditched the emojis that look, "... Roundly amorphous, like cookie dough plopped onto a baking sheet." This allows the audience to realize how genuine the author is about her subject, no matter how insignificant something as emojis can be. It also fits the subject matter. It would be a lot less interesting to read an article about emojis with a boring tone to it. The author appeals to pathos throughout nearly the entire article with the goal of increasing her credibility. She uses it especially well when doing the history section of her article not only to help her get her point across but to give people the opportunity to see for themselves what made the emojis before what they are today, and why Google decided to make the switch. The author's purpose of this article is to 1: inform the audience about the new change to Google emoji's, why they were bad before, and why they decided to make the change, and 2: What her own opinion about the new emojis are. She introduces the purpose right form the start by talking about how unappealing the old emojis were and how glad she personally is about Google's decision to change them. I think that the author's purpose was presented phenomenally, but was very biased in some parts. This may be somewhat of a turn off for readers who were fans of Google's previous emojis. The author discusses her argument by first talking about the fact that google changed their emojis, then by explaining the history behind emojis in general. Then she talks about why Google's emojis were becoming a problem and needed a necessary change. Finally, she talks about why the new emojis are better than the older ones. She also subtlety sprinkles her own opinion into each part. Evidence-wise she uses many different quotes and sources from many different places to support her claims. Most of her evidence is simply other articles talking about what she wants to get across, so it is efficient for her to write and easy for the reader to click on if they want to find out more about what she was trying to say. Every piece of evidence she used was very strong and straight to the point so there were no places throughout the paper where her argument was truly weak. She was able to back up every claim she made including her own opinions by sharing the thoughts and works of others. The authors use of a positive tone, an appeal to ethos, and very solid evidence helps immensely to create an argument informing the reader on why Google's change to their emojis was a good idea, while backing up the authors personal opinion.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |