TOW #19: MAC vs. DELL advertisement

   The competition between Mac and Dell computers has been around for the last ten years, with competing advertisements being thrown into TV stations left and right. One recent ad features a Macbook laptop calling a Dell laptop a "nerd", and a the Dell calling the macbook a "pretty boy". This advertisement was for Dell. With use of clever word choice and personification, Dell essentially argues that their computers are better.

    The Ad provides clever word choice to the audience, as "nerd" and "pretty boy" are often said in the gossip going around high schools or even to label someone. The terms are not only relevant to the computers, but the word choice was perfect because it is easy for the audience to understand. For example, the Dell laptop calls the Mac "pretty boy" to show that the Mac is loved so much because it is designed to be a more visual appealing computer. On the other hand, Mac calls Dell a "nerd", because although it may be smarter, the computer is less attractive. So, Dell provides the underlying yet ultimate question: when it comes to computers, which aspect is more important, the visual aspect or the intelligence of the technology? Dell figured that most would choose the intelligence aspect because computers are made to provide information among other things. Because the two terms "nerd" and "pretty boy" are the only text on the ad, it is impressive that Dell is able to make such a solid argument.

  The ad also utilizes personification. The audience is perfectly aware that computers technically can't talk to each other, but the ad jumps at the chance to allow the devices to speak to each other, not only for a bit of humor, but also to represent the rivalry between the two companies. Dell wants to make its position clear and the company does so by allowing their computer to speak. This makes it much easier for audiences to comprehend, and also gives the technology a personality. The personification allows Dell to cement its argument.

The Dell and Mac rivalry will continue, but this ad provides a new perspective and raises that question of whether the value lies within the attractiveness of the laptop or the intelligence. Dell uses personification and clever word choice to make it clear to the audience that Dell is the better laptop, because it is smarter, and because the looks of the laptop doesn't mean much in the long run.



 

TOW #18: How to Say Nothing in 500 Words

(Link)

Recently in class, we were told to read George Orwell's "Politics and the English Language". This essay set a couple of standards and rules to adhere to when writing in politics- or any pieces in general. An essay I found, written by Paul McHenry Roberts, has a similar purpose. I thought that I might be able to compare and contrast the two pieces while also analyzing the new one I have read. In his essay, Roberts uses humor and enumeration in order to provide his audience with a better understanding of how to write short essays.
   The text begins by giving an example of an English teacher who assigns a 500 word essay about college football to his students. Right off the bat, Roberts connected with me, as I am a student and I understand the difficulties of writing about such a broad topic in such a small amount of words. Roberts then goes on to give a sample essay written at 10 PM the night before it was due (also a relatable asset...) and explains why it was unthoughtful and worthless- deserving of a "D". Here, Roberts uses a little bit of humor when describing the common student and how they write heir essays. Keeping in mind that this essay was written in the 1950s, Roberts claims, "Saturday night you have a date, and Sunday morning you have to go to church. (You can't let English assignments interfere with your religion.) What with one thing and another, it's ten o'clock Sunday night before you get out the typewriter again. You make a pot of coffee and start to fill out your views on college football." (Roberts, 1). His relatable humor here is very effective because he is able to connect with the reader, and gives the audience something to relate to. 
   The essay then goes on to list some of the ways to avoid getting that "D" on the assignment. Similarly to Orwell, he tells his audience about the importance of eliminating any kind of abstraction. He writes, "Look at the work of any professional writer and notice how constantly he is moving from the generality, the abstract statement, to the concrete example, the facts and figures, the illustrations. If he is writing on juvenile delinquency, he does not just tell you that juveniles are (it seems to him) delinquent and that (in his opinion) something should be done about it." (1). Not only does Roberts refer to yet another topic that I can relate to (delinquents...not that I am one), but he is explaining to his reader that great writers use legitimate examples, instead of abstract ideas. In contrast to Orwell, Roberts also writes about "taking the less usual side" in writing. He goes on to say that he best essays go against the common public opinion. He wants his audience to get a bit risky while also being smart about it. Roberts also uses many examples to explain why the simple can be so much better than the complicated- just like Orwell. One clear similarity between the two essays was that both authors made a point to explain to the audience that before taking any advice for the essays, make sure the advice taken will help, not hurt. It is better for writing to make sense than to try and follow every rule that has been mentioned. These are suggestions, not necessarily guidelines. The listing of these strategies made the essay extremely easy to follow, while also keeping it organized. 

         Roberts was definitely successful in getting across his message to the reader. His full-circle ending with the inclusion of the college football essay mentioned in the beginning was perfect. Through a bit of humor and enumeration, Roberts was able to suggest ideas and maybe provoke some change in the way short essays are written. Just as Orwell wrote, clear and concise is best.

IRB Preview

Through tons of consideration and overthinking, I have decided to read Aron Ralston's 127 Hours: Between a Rock and a Hard Place. First, I'd like to point out that in no way, shape, or form, will I have the stomach for this book- but I'm trying something new. I have not seen the movie, and I predict that the story will not only be intriguing, but also horrifying. Needless to say, I'm excited... and nervous.

Aron Ralston's Between a Rock and a Hard Place

    The well-known author, Ralston, wrote the book in 2004, after the tragic incident by which the book was inspired. Aron Ralston was hiking when his arm was caught under an 800-pound boulder, and there was no escaping it. Telling no one where he was headed, Ralston faces reality: there's one way to get out, and it will hurt. Personally, I am not too ecstatic for the gory details, but I have always been interested in the story ever since I had heard about it, but I never got around to learning about he sequence of events that this man suffered through. Luckily, Aron had a video camera on him to tape his dreadful six days, with little water, and almost no food. I chose this book because although it is a memoir, it is smaller-scoped because it will take place in a small amount of time, instead of over a lifetime.
    If I had to predict some strategies that Ralston will use to make his book interesting, two obvious candidates would be the appeal to pathos and ethos. Ralson has probably told his story over and over again, and because he suffered the pain and he wrote the book, it will be that much more believable. The emotional appeal is automatic. How can one not feel for a man who was closer to death every second? In my opinion, I guarantee some of the emotional appeal won't even be intentional, but through the plot line, it will just come. I also predict the use of similes and metaphors to express the pain he went through during his 127 hours. Last but not least, I can't even imagine the imagery that will be splattered on the pages of this book. This will be his most powerful tool. The imagery provokes the reader to react to the situation, and to imagine what it would be like to be there in the canyon- stuck between a rock and a hard place. I hope I am not let down by this book because I'm extremely excited (and nervous, of course) to read it!!

TOW #17: Superbowl commercial (Budweiser)

In light of the recent football game, I decided to analyze the Budweiser superbowl commercial. This commercial is difficult, because, as adorable as it is, it does not relate to the product whatsoever. In a way, the commercial is both effective and ineffective at the same time. Coincidentally, most of the superbowl commercials are like this, including the ones about Bud Light and Doritos.

    In the commercial, it begins with a puppy at an adoption farm. One of the puppies escapes its little pen and runs off under a fence and into a barn- only to see it's much bigger friend, a horse. This automatically attracts the viewer not only because the puppy is adorable, but because the relationship between the horse and the dog is strange, and it leaves you wanting more out of the story. As the commercial goes along, the viewer sees that a young man owns the barn with the horse, and a young woman owns the puppy and the puppy farm. And surprise, surprise, they end up together at the end of the commercial, because the man has to repeatedly return the puppy back to the puppy farm. Ultimately, this commercial touches on the emotional and "aw
www" senses of the audience, but is that enough to sell the product? My answer is no.
   The commercial's goal is both to be entertaining and sell the product- beer from Budweiser. The thing is, though, not a single beer is seen throughout the entire commercial. In this sense, the commercial loses its effectiveness. Some may argue, though, that the commercial does leave a mark in the audience's mind because of how emotional and cute it was, but at the same time, you may remember the commercial, but not what the commercial is for. I will agree, though, the slogan "Best Buds" does put a reminder in the viewers' minds about what the commercial advertises. Personally, I do remember because every year, Budweiser has the same kind of commercial- with an emotional appeal. It also features the same actor as well.
    This was definitely a tricky commercial to analyze because it had many factors that could have went into making it effective or ineffective. Overall, though, I think in its purpose, the commercial was completely ineffective, and would leave the audience with no remembrance of what the commercial was actually advertising- but instead, leaving the image of a cute little puppy dancing with a horse, which makes no connection with beer at all.