This essay focused on four different sources of my choice, in which I analyzed each one and compared them to each other regarding their rhetorical situation. I chose the topic of social media and it’s effect on our ‘connectedness’ with people in the real world because it’s a controversial topic that interests me since I am a daily user of social media. 

Delving Deeper into the Controversy

Controversy surrounding violence in video games has sparked a debate as to whether they’re to blame for the rise in terror and glorification of brutality and cruelty. This discussion has been argued about since the creation of the rating system in 1994 (uwire text). Moreover, countless newspaper articles, social media posts, and media surrounding the issue has brought forth different perspectives. Due to the variety of authors writing about the topic and their different backgrounds and motives, one can find that the rhetoric of different works can vary quite a bit regardless of the similarity of the subject at hand.

One twitter post made by Donald Trump in December of 2012 highlights his view on the issue of video game violence as he proclaims, “Video game violence & glorification must be stopped-it is creating monsters!” Trump’s tweets have a rather large audience of people around the world from both sides of the political spectrum. The purpose of this tweet may have to do with his run for presidency in future years. With this intent in mind, he may have tweeted his point of view to foreshadow the types of issues he might focus on when he runs for presidency. The sense of urgency in the tweet and use of punctuation displays Trump’s assertiveness and perhaps his willingness to act upon the matter. In addition, his tone suggests that he holds a biased opinion on the subject, due to him almost sounding angry at video games by making a bold statement signifying causation with video games and violence in the real world. Because of his political influence, the intended audience may be that of American citizens who are potential voters in elections to come. The exigence of this tweet may be in light of recent mass shootings, which could have urged Trump to make a statement proposing a potential cause for the issue.

Contrary to Trump’s tweet, a magazine article published on Psychology Today gives an objective overview of the debate surrounding video game violence. The author focuses on The Supreme Court’s decisions to dismiss the relationship between video games and violence due to the lack of consensus among researchers as well as the lack of consistent and credible findings from psychological research (Vitelli). The author’s ethos contributes to the credibility of the article as he has a doctoral degree and outlines the situation as opposed to trying to change the reader’s views. Since the genre is a magazine article, there is an unemotional tone that contrasts heavily to that of the twitter post made by Trump. Because this article is published in the magazine, “Psychology Today”, the audience is anyone interested in psychology as well as those who take interest in magazines. Although the audience is similarly broad to Trump’s audience, the ethos of the writer denotes that there is no agenda he may be writing for, and that the article’s purpose is merely to inform of the inconsistent psychological links between video games and violence. The purpose to inform is also revealed through use of relevant data in accordance to his claims. For example, he quotes psychologist Christopher J. Ferguson to explain the different issues with linking video game violence and real-life violence. This differs greatly from Trump’s twitter post because of the lack of an opinion, which differentiates between the intent to inform and the intent to persuade.

A newspaper article published on Gale Infotrac Newsstand gives a biased perspective on the violence issue. Due to the nature of the article being an editorial, the author’s purpose is to persuade the reader to believe in the lack of correlation between video game violence and real-life violence through the extensive use of logos. This approach is distinct to that of the magazine article due to the use of logical reasoning to appeal to the reader. For instance, the author uses questions to persuade the reader to believe that correlation between video games and violence is unreasonable, while the magazine article uses data to explain facts surrounding the topic instead. This is further apparent as the author states, “Through the years, studies have shown that violence in video games has little to no correlation to promoting violent acts in real life”, without any real evidence backing it up. This is comparable to the tweet made by Trump because of the lack of evidence and intent to persuade the audience with passion. This is demonstrated as the author evokes an assertive tone when he affirms that “Parents need to take a more active role in determining the types of games their children play instead of using it as a scapegoat for a more serious problem” and makes bold claims accusing people of “random blaming” (uwire text). This tone and choice of words reveals the author’s level of devotion and bias on the topic. The audience in this article is anyone who reads the newspaper, which could be targeted towards the older population. This may also explain the intent to persuade, since much of the people playing violent video games who would support the author’s view are in the younger population, who may not read newspapers as much. Similarly to both Trump’s tweet and the magazine article, the issue that prompted the author to write is the ongoing controversy between real-life violence and video game violence as a result of brutal acts committed by members of society.

The perspective shifts from broad violence to violence against women in a research article suggesting the links between portrayals of women in video games and sexual objectification and victimization of women in real life. The extensive use of evidence and studies portray the author’s intent to inform the reader of the many possible links between video games and the negative portrayal of women. This is shown through its nature of being a research paper, meant to find and present results regarding the many questions regarding potential links between the variables. There is an analytical tone maintained throughout the article, contrasting greatly to the informal tone present in Trump’s tweet. The author’s purpose in writing also differs from the rest of the sources as it doesn’t look at violence at a whole but specifically focuses on violence against women. This results in a shift of the targeted audience and may primarily focus on those interested and concerned with research on the negative portrayal and treatment of women. In addition, the targeted audience may also appeal to researchers who are conducting similar studies discussed in the article. The nature of this source being a research article signifies the intent to inform and make connections based on information gathered. The exigence of the text may stem from the long history of negative depiction of women and the underlying issue of sexual objectification in society. This issue may have prompted the writer to analyze different research that may suggest a link between video games and the portrayal of women to raise awareness and answer several questions regarding the topic. Because this is a scholarly article edited by peers, there is credibility in the argument that differs from the less formal tweet, as the author holds similarly strong ethos to the author of the magazine article.

There is no shortage of written articles, statements, and tweets surrounding the controversy of video games and their association with violence. Analyzing different works through a rhetorical lens can reveal the differences in motive despite similarities in topic and stance. The ongoing discussion of this subject has resulted in a wide array of texts in which the rhetoric holds a significant role in guiding the author’s message. Through the similarities and differences of the articles, one can truly understand the significance of rhetorical situation.