Analyzing Rhetorical Strategies in NASA to Cut Back Scientific Missions Because of Budget

Appeals to credibility or character:

There are many strategies that the author uses in the article for credibility. His main sources of credibility come from references to credible people and word choice. For example, the author quotes many astrophysicists and astronomers that work for NASA, and show how they feel about the budget cut along with how they have been effected. His word choice that he uses creates a very focused and serious tone, showing how important it is for NASA to keep these scientific projects in action. The use quoting the workers of NASA created credibility in the article by giving actual and informative answers to how the budget cuts have been affecting NASA. This shows the audience that the article is relaying correct information, making the agree with the issues and problems that are being discussed in the article. The word choice effects the audience by showing the intelligence of the author. When the other uses words such as "feared" and "notable" it gives the audience a sense of feeling the issue which connects them to the article. Most importantly the author of this article has written two books about Astronomy. One is called Lonely Hearts of the Cosmos and the other one is called The Scientific Search for the Secret of the Universe. Both of these books even deal with the same subject as the article giving the article even more credibility by showing the the author knows what he is talking about.

Appeals to emotion:

Their are two strategies of appeals to emotion in my text which are: Shocking Statisitcs and repetition of key words. These two strategies are used to create emotion towards the audience while they read the article. The statistics in the article pertain two the amount of money that is being cut along with the certain projects that are being postponed. The key words that the author uses are "future", "outraged", and "alarmed". all of these words are used to show how the scientists are feeling making the audience see what the cuts are doing to NASA. When they see these adjectives they can connect to the feeling. Also the word "future" triggers the values of many of the readers because it is what science focus is. The author is trying to get an emotional response of sympathy and anger. He wants to be to understand the importance of funding NASA. To the audience, the actual result is not a strong emotionally but still their. The author could have brought in more of his own opinions to create more feeling, instead of relaying feelings from other sources. These strategies are efficient towards credibility because correct statistics in any article will create credibility. They show cold hard facts.

Appeal to logic:

The authors appeals to logic overlap with his appeals to credibility because they work for both. The addition of expert opinions and interviews are used throughout the majority of the article. There are interviews from Astronomers and the scientists that work for NASA. The expert opinions help towards credibility and also logic as it is information from a professional in the Subject. The author is trying to receive a very trustworthy response from the audience by including all these strategies and information. As a result, these strategies work because no one can ignore responses from professionals on the situation. The logical fallacies in the article are mainly hast generalizations. For example, the author talks a quote one of the project scientists who says that they are going to lose many intelligent employees at NASA. He said that most of the people who get fired and find new jobs will not come back. This generalization is hasty because there is no real statistic that if the people leave they won't come back. It has happened a couple times, but that doesn't mean they all won't come back. NASA is the biggest science company in the United States. It is a stretch to say that. This effects the reader by making them jump to a conclusion with little examples to back up their conclusions with.