What motivates a writer to write? To construct an argument? While fiction writers may look to their imaginations, non-fiction writers are motivated by an occasion or exigence. Something prompts them; they react to an event, issue, or situation. The shooting down of the Malaysian Airlines plane is an example of this occasion or exigence. Here are links to two different articles that react to this occasion. One article relies heavily on logos (logic, reasoning) to support a clear, strong claim that is stated at the end. The other also uses logos, but also brings in pathos (appeals to emotion, imagination) to develop a claim that is indirectly stated. Read both articles and choose one to discuss the claim (basically a thesis) and the use of logical and/or emotional appeals. You may also react to anything else you notice about the articles and/or issue.
"Don't Blame Malaysian Airlines"
"Malaysia, the World's Unluckiest Airline, Will Now Struggle to Survive"
In the article, “Don’t Blame Malaysia Airlines”, the author’s opinion is that the disaster is not the airlines fault. He gave evidence proving that the aircraft was following safety rules and regulations using logic and facts. An example is “ In principle, every airline flight can minimize travel time, emissions, fuel burn and overall cost by taking the most direct point-to-point route. In practice, everything about commercial aviation involves making adjustments to that ideal direct routing, all of which is managed by the international air control system.” The author used pathos and appeal to emotion in his conclusion when he said, “Malaysia Airlines, its crew and passengers and the civil aviation system are the objects of this crime and tragedy. The finger-pointing should not be at them, but at the criminals.”
ReplyDeleteIn this article, "Malaysia, the World's Unluckiest Airline, Will Now Struggle to Survive", the writer's opinion is that the Malaysian airline won't survive financially. The author uses pathos the appeal to emotion, "Whatever hope remained was dashed by two crushing tragedies." The author also points out people will choose other airlines because of fear. Schuman (author) also uses logos. "The fact is the national carrier is in no shape to absorb the cost of these catastrophes. Analysts even wonder if the carrier will be able to recover." Schuman uses a quote for the conclusion using his main points of pathos "The resurrecting will be painful for a lot of people, but a phoenix can rise from the ashes."
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteIn the article, "Don't Blame Malaysian Airlines"; Fallows', the author, believes that the Malaysian plane crashing once again is not the flight's fault. Yes all 298 people on the Malaysian flight died, but why does he believe it wasn't the flight's fault? Fallows has many facts throughout the article adding to the logical appeal of it. "Since April, the F.A.A. has flatly probibited all flights by American carriers over the Crimean region of Ukraine-- but not over the region 200 miles to the north where the Malaysia flight was shot down." Yes, Malaysia was close to the region, but they were only trying to conserve fuel and take the closest route, plus they were still in a safe zone. "Ukrainian authorities had prohibited flights at 32,000 feet and below across eastern parts of the country." "Therefore when they crossed this zone at 33,000 feet, they were neither cutting it razor-close nor bending the rules, but doing what many other airlines had done, in a way they assumed was legal and safe." There was definitely stuff going on in the area, but Malaysian airlines thought they were still in a zone that was safe enough for travel. It wasn't even acfually a war zone. It was just for safety in case of accidental fire or other things. Also they weren't even in that zone, it was just their luck that the entire flight died. The other article, talks more about Malaysia's flight appearance and the airline's future. Most say they are basically done, as many won't want to ride their flights anymore due to what has happened. It's more emotional, with not as many facts. Basically both articles believe it's not Malaysian Airline's fault for the second accident in four months.
ReplyDeleteIn Malaysia, the World’s Unluckiest Airline, Will Now Struggle to
ReplyDeleteSurvive. The author say that their business will be struggling financially. The reason the author said that is because of the 2 tragedies Flight 370 vanished somewhere in the Indian Ocean with 239 passengers on board. And Flight 17 was shot down over Ukraine,
causing the loss of another 298 souls. Even though in the article 'Don't Blame Malaysia Airlines' said we can't blame them for what happened. It's hard to trust an airline that has had so many things go wrong, and have had 537 lives lost. Mohshin Aziz, said that "The outlook is dire." I'd have to agree with the author when he said,
The next months could prove humbling for an airline that had
grand ambitions. And I could tell that the author was using pathos, to get to the audience.
The author of this opinion piece, James Fallows, uses logical reasoning and fact to support his perspective on the MH17 disaster.
ReplyDeleteFallows claims that:" Malaysia Airlines, its crew and passengers and the civil aviation system are the objects of the crime and tragedy. The finger-pointing should not be at them, but at the criminals." Fallows supports his claim by analyzing and presenting the procedural protocol that's followed by pilots and the F.A.A. The F.A.A. maintains special notices that are regularly updated, in order to notify pilots of dangerous areas in which they need to be wary or completely avoid altogether. Fallows explains why MH17 was allowed to fly over a war zone:" Since April, the F.A.A. has flatly prohibited all flights by American carriers over the Crimean region of Ukraine -- but not over the region 200 miles to the north where the Malaysian Airlines flight was shot down."
I understand that the international airlines system needs to maintain its efficiency and quickness in the face of danger and even war, but I don't think that shorter flights and more fuel efficient routes are worth the lives of innocent people
In the article, “Don’t Blame Malaysian Airlines” by James Fallows, his opinion is that the Malaysian plane crash is not the airline carriers fault but maybe some convicts on the ground. Even though there were close to 300 fatalities he doesn’t believe the airline is responsible for those lives lost. In the article he explains to us that there are specific zones where it is dangerous for planes to fly at. The zone in which they were flying in it was unsafe to fly below 32,000 ft. “they crossed this zone at 33,000 feet, they were neither cutting it razor-close nor bending the rule” They followed the rules and flew high enough to avoid danger. But obviously that wasn’t the case so it wasn’t the airlines fault because they took the right safety precautions. The author used emotional appeal through pathos at the very end of this article. He wrote, “Malaysia Airlines, its crew and passengers and the civil aviation system are the objects of this crime and tragedy. The finger-pointing should not be at them, but at the criminals”. He brings out our emotions through talking about the deaths that occurred but suggests the blame shouldn’t be pointed towards the airline but the convicts. I disagree but agree at the same time. I understand that airlines want to save money on fuel by taking the easiest and quickest way there but sometimes that way isn't the best. Hopefully the Malaysian Airlines will learn from this and take higher precautions and not fly near danger zones at all. How many more innocent people lives have to be taken until they realize spending a little more money on fuel is worth it to make it more safe for their passengers.
ReplyDeleteIn the article "Don't Blame Malaysian Airlines" the author suggests that it is not the airlines fault for the plane being shot down, but another question is, why were they over that zone anyways? Well flying over that prohibited area could of caused them to use less fuel or minimize the flight travel times. Although, they usually will request it instead of just going for it without the dispatchers opinion first. Even in the U.S. the planes need to take a left or right turn right away as they take off from Reagen Airport to avoid the White House. The pilot knew that when he was flying over the Ukraine, that they had strictly prohibited flights at 32,000 feet. The plane, flying at 33,000 feet, was shot down. Therefore it should be the criminals fault, not the airlines.
ReplyDeleteIn the article “Don't Blame Malaysian Airlines” it talks about how the Malaysian Airline is not to blame for almost 300 deaths. It used logos to point out how the plane was flying over the legal height, for safety and the law, and it was very unlikely that a plane would be shot while in mid flight, where the move vulnerable place a plane can be in was,taking off and landing. They used pathos to point out that Malaysian Airline should not be blamed for something they did not do,and that was out of their control. the people that shot down the plane and killed so many people should take the blame. This was out of the Malaysian Airlines control completely. They were where they thought was the safest, and an airplane of that size could not veer off course to avoid the shots, even if the pilots had seen it coming.
ReplyDeleteIn the article “Don’t Blame Malaysian Airlines”, the claim is that the airline should not be blamed for the airplane that was shot down. He cited that the pilots were doing nothing wrong in either occasion, as they were, “...following all normal safety rules.” Also, before the flight, the crew and dispatchers were warned that Ukrainian authorities had prohibited flight at 32,000 feet and below across eastern parts of the country. Therefore, “...when they crossed this zone at 33,000 feet, they were neither cutting it razor-close nor bending the rules...” Lastly, Malaysian Airlines should not be considered at fault because, “...aircraft at cruising altitude are beyond the reach of anything except strictly military antiaircraft equipment.” All of these supporting quotes came directly from the article, and everything seemed to fit in well. One more thing is that planes from other airliners have flown over war-zones like Afghanistan and Iraq without any problem, so the Malaysian company had no reason to suspect anything out of the ordinary. In conclusion, the author used both logos and pathos to share his opinion that Malaysian Airlines is not at fault for this horrible disaster. The logos came in with the facts he shared like how the plane was flying about 1,000 feet above the minimum amount and how they had no reason to expect anything like this, and the pathos was demonstrated when he applied emotion in order to get his point across. An example of pathos comes in with the following and concluding quote: “The finger-pointing should not be at [the airline], but at the criminals [responsible].”
ReplyDeleteThe author of "Don't Blame Malaysia Airlines" maintains a thesis that Malaysia Airlines is not to blame for this recent catastrophe. This author uses logos frequently to express their point. The author uses many facts like that the airline was following all rules and regulations for the area.
ReplyDeleteIn the article, “Don’t Blame Malaysian Airlines,” the author blatantly states that the Malaysian airline being shot down isn’t the airlines fault, but it is the terrorists’ fault. The author raises the question of why they were flying over that area. The reason that they crossed over this zone could have been that it was a shorter route so that the passengers would get there faster and so that they could also use less fuel. Before the flight took off, the crew and passengers were notified that Ukraine had prohibited flights under 32,000 feet because of the fighting going on near the eastern border. This plane was doing what every other plane flying across the border was doing, flying at 33,000 feet. Flying at this height would keep them safe from accidental fire. The crew didn’t expect a military attack, which is why it is the terrorists’ fault, not Malaysian Airlines.
ReplyDelete"Malaysia, the World's Unluckiest Airline, Will Now Struggle to Survive," is an article on the tragic events that occurred in a span of months which both relate back to Malaysian airlines. The authors main belief is that Malaysia will most likely not be able to recover from these events on a business stand point and emotional level. "Analysts are concerned the the fallout will scare passengers away from flying on the airline, or force management to discount tickets to convince them to book- reducing revenue either way. That could push the airlines fragile finances to the breaking point," but finances is not the only set back in Malaysia. After families losing so many people the author believes it will be emotionally difficult to build the airline back up to the booming business it hoped to be. "The reconstruction will be painful for a lot of people, but a phoenix can rise from ashes."
ReplyDeleteDon’t Blame Malaysia Airlines
ReplyDeleteThe writer’s claim is that Malaysia airlines are not to blame for the flight flying over the Ukraine being shot down. The writer uses logos by stating the rules that the airlines are supposed to follow, and then showing us how they followed them. “Therefore when they crossed this zone at 33,000 feet, they were neither cutting it razor-close nor bending the rules, but doing what many other airlines had done, in a way they assumed was both legal and safe.” Ethos and pathos were not needed to prove his point because stating the facts was enough. Malaysia airlines are not to blame because none of the airline rules were broken.
I chose to do the "Don't Blame Malaysian Airlines" article. The shooting down of the Malaysian Flight made me outraged. 298 people killed. 298 family members. All dead. I don't want to blame anyone, but how does that happen when all the "normal safety rules" were met. Maybe all of the airlines need to increase the safety rules so another 298 people aren't killed again. Isn't someone's life more valuable than a little extra money to pay for fuel. When will the world stop focusing on money and start focusing on the lives and safety of others? But then I guess we all have to take a moment, like the article said, and ask who is to blame? Who do we point our fingers at? They were considerably being safe and legal. The Malaysian airlines are not to blame now, because they were following the rules given.
ReplyDeleteIn the article "Don't Blame Malaysian Airlines". The authors opinion in this article is that it is not the Malaysian Airlines fault. He convinces the audience of his opinion through the use of logic. For example he explained all of the things a normal crew does and how this was just like every other normal flight, abiding by every flight rule and safety guideline. " Before a flight, an airliner’s crew coordinates with company dispatchers about any necessary deviations from the desired route. During flight, they make further adjustments — to avoid thunderstorms, for example. They often request route shifts to the north or south, or changes of altitude, to find smoother air or more favorable winds." "Therefore when they crossed this zone at 33,000 feet, they were neither cutting it razor-close nor bending the rules, but doing what many other airlines had done, in a way they assumed was both legal and safe. Legal in much the way that driving 63 in a 65-mile-per-hour zone would be." Though he uses logic all through the article he finishes with a touch of emotion at the end, by saying, "Malaysia Airlines, its crew and passengers and the civil aviation system are the objects of this crime and tragedy. The finger-pointing should not be at them, but at the criminals."
ReplyDeleteIn the article "Don't Blame Malaysian Airlines". The authors thesis is that the deaths caused were not the airlines fault even though 298 people died flying in their aircraft. The author uses logos in this article. An example of this is when the author said, "Malaysia Airlines, already world famous because of the still-missing flight MH370, appears to have been following all normal safety rules. And the rules governing airline flights over danger zones, including Ukraine, reflect the balance between the risks inherent in any flight and the efficiency on which the world airline system depends." and another example would be, "Therefore when they crossed this zone at 33,000 feet, they were neither cutting it razor-close nor bending the rules, but doing what many other airlines had done, in a way they assumed was both legal and safe. Legal in much the way that driving 63 in a 65-mile-per-hour zone would be."
ReplyDeleteI chose to read "Don't blame Malaysian Airlines. The author claimed that it is not the Malaysian airlines fault. The author displays a lot of logos to prove his point. In the article he states "Before a flight, an airliner’s crew coordinates with company dispatchers about any necessary deviations from the desired route. During flight, they make further adjustments — to avoid thunderstorms, for example. They often request route shifts to the north or south, or changes of altitude, to find smoother air or more favorable winds," basically saying sometimes planes have to reroute and they have no other choice if they want to keep passengers safe.The author also gives other logic and thought in to why the reader should agree. One thing I noticed about the argument is there wasn't a very good counter claim or counter argument.
ReplyDeleteIn the article "Malaysia, the World's Unluckiest Airline, Will Now Struggle to Survive," the author talks about how the Malaysian airline business may never be able to recover from these tragic incidents, from both a business standpoint and emotionally. The business was already struggling financially and took two crushing blows. Most people believe that people will be too scared to fly on their airlines anymore. There are options for the business, but they unfavorable. “Analysts are concerned that the fallout will scare passengers away from flying on the airline, or force management to discount tickets to convince them to book — reducing revenue either way.” The Malaysian airlines were once a business that looked like it would succeed, but were thrown into a terrible situation leaving the business in an unwanted position.
ReplyDeleteIn the article, "Don't Blame Malaysia Airlines", the author highlights the fact that fingers should not be pointed at Malaysia airlines for the shoot down of their plane, but at the people who shot the plane. The author uses logos to by pointing out facts about the safety precautions taken by the airline, at that they did everything that they were told to do regarding flight over Ukraine. They flew at the proper height, stayed away from the restricted regions of the country, and did everything by the books. And because of these things the author tells that the shoot down was not in their hands. And the blame show be projected at the criminals who shot it down, and not the innocent airline.
ReplyDelete"Don't Blame Malaysian Airlines" is an article filled with logos. It takes a logical approach from the very begining. The author talks about preflight protocol and goes through the list of what every airline does to ensure a safe, quick, cost effective flight. Making sure their planes stay out of unauthorized flying zones is a key preflight protocol that the airlines go through. Then the aurthor finishes off by talking about the restriction over the area where the plane was shot down and reveals that the plane was not breaking any regulations there for it was not the airlines fault.
ReplyDeleteI read the article: “Don’t Blame Malaysian Airlines” by James Fallows. In the article, the author strives to point out that the plane being shot down was not the airlines fault, but instead the people who shot it down should be at fault. In the article he uses logos by supplying an over encumbering amount of information relative to the airline being shot down.
ReplyDelete