Snuggie commercial ethos pathos logos

Unit 2 paper expectations Hello all. As with Unit 1, I wanted to give you some expectations I have for your Unit 2 papers. These are the things I’m looking at when grading. You may treat it as a loose rubric. I’m also emphasizing things in this list that I see students falter on fairly regularly with this assignment. 1. The paper should meet the requirements on the assignment sheet. These include: a. Analyzing and evaluating an ad that fits the requirements on the assignment sheet. (For example, a print ad, not a video. A current ad, as in from the year 2000 or later, not a really old ad. See assignment sheet for more details.) b. Meeting length requirements and formatting requirements (850 words minimum, 12 pt. Times New Roman, having a title, double-spaced, etc.). See assignment sheet for more details. 2. The paper should have a thesis statement. This is generally included near the beginning of the paper. The last sentence of the first paragraph is the most common spot. This thesis should cover something about how the ad sends its message and whether or not you believe the ad was effective (this can be limited by audience if you wish). For example, a model thesis for this paper might be, “Hyundai’s clever use of (insert something they did well) and (insert something else the ad does well) make it an effective way to convince customers that (whatever the ad is claiming).” Another possibility might be, “While the ad uses (name prominent trait) well, the ad may alienate some viewers by (point out something that may not appeal to some potential viewers).” Your specific pattern may vary, but what’s important is you’re saying something about how the ad sends its message and whether you feel the ad will be effective. 3. The paper should be written with the company producing the product/service being advertised as its audience. That is, if you’re analyzing a Nike ad, write as though decision-makers like CEOs or a board at Nike have asked for your take on the ad, and this is what you are writing for them to read over. 4. The paper should be written as though the ad has not yet been released. So you would not talk about public reactions to the ad that have already happened, for example. We’re trying to give a fairly objective view of the ad on its own merits. 5. The paper should focus on the ad, not the product. One thing I see a lot is that students sometimes focus on the product or service being advertised rather than the ad and how it sends its message. Remember your overall goal is to give the company your view of the ad and its effectiveness. So if you’re writing about an ad for Levi jeans, you wouldn’t write a paper about why Levi jeans are awful or wonderful. Your central goal is to analyze and evaluate the ad. 6. The paper should not include much, if any, outside research. The goal here is to give your thoughts about the ad. So there really shouldn’t be any need to cite a lot of outside information. You have the tools you need to analyze this ad. For example, we’ve talked about rhetoric, and we’ve talked about visual rhetoric. You should be able to use some of these concepts and terms to discuss the ad and why its tactics may or may not work. 7. Your analysis should be YOUR analysis. Above all, be very, very careful not to just parrot what someone else has said about the ad. I really don’t even recommend reading an ad analysis of the ad you’re using, as you can easily “poison the well” by limiting how you see the ad to the things you’ve read about it instead of creating your own message. Do not put yourself at risk by getting into Academic Dishonesty issues. 8. Your paper should use paragraphs.