Rhetorical Analysis

I have chosen to analyze BG’s article called “Does Twitter Promote Democracy?”  The author is trying to convince people into politics that also prefer to use social media that it is not the most effective way of communication and does not go faster. BG uses an illusion and enumeratio ineffectively to convince social media user’s, interested in politics, that the use of social media to communicate with government leaders is only works on a small scale with local leaders. However, the use of a rhetorical questions helps him get his point across to his audience. In the end the author was effective at showing getting their point across. BG uses an enumeratio comparing emails, tweeting, and other forms of social media to the process a letter goes through before a political leader sees it. The author does well explaining the letter process, however, how social media works remains a mystery.  The author presumes that the reader will understand how social media communication works, which does make since for his audience. However, presuming that social media would go through the same process as a letter instead of using facts weakens the author’s argument. It could also leave social media users confused about how the two are comparable. The use of an allusion comparing social media to “snail mail” is effective in that it grabs the reader’s attention. However, it is confusing because it makes the authors argument unclear. Though the use of an enumeratio and an illusion makes his argument weak the use of a hyperbola helps the author’s argument become clearer. The author asks, “Does … Chile’s president have a process in place to manage his Twitter conversation [?]” (BG 110). This question helps the reader to feel more engaged in the article and explains why the author did not explain how whether or not social media and letters were the same earlier in the article. The author then proceeds to answer their own question by saying that it would only make since. The author becomes speaks more personally as he explains that though Chile’s president could find a few good ideas from social media it would be impossible to read every single social media post or comment sent to him. This makes the explanation using the letter make more since because if the president of the United States receives 20,000 letters per day just imagine how many social media conversations he receives. In the end the rhetorical question to bring his argument together and convince social media users that communication directly to political users using social media only works on a small scale.