Expert Answer:Negative And Positive Effects of Video Gaming Visu


Solved by verified expert:This paper is a visual rhetorical analysis of two pictures an organization created, which is also a stakeholder in my discussion. My topic is concerned with whether video games are beneficial or harmful, and the organization that is selected must support one of the sides of the debate and also have TWO original images, not from another source. A sample paper is attached to show what type of images are being utilized and how it is integrated within the text. A flaw in the sample paper is that they do not give the images proper titles, and when discussing rhetorical strategies they use the names of the rhetorical appeals (Ethos, Logos, Pathos, Kairos) which is NOT to be mentioned directly, but rather explained. The papers total word count should be between 1200-1400, and have 3 sources in total.An introduction that clearly identifies the stakeholder and its background (context), the controversial issue, and the thesis that presents the relationship between the two images and the stakeholder’s main argument, including how the two images represent the stakeholder’s goals, which encompass its interests, missions, and messageAn analysis of the rhetorical strategies used in both images, taking into consideration audience, message, purpose, rhetorical appeals, and/or rhetorical fallacies (if they exist), and pointing to specific details from the image to support your claimAn integration of at least three sources into your visual analysis; one must be a source from the stakeholder, and the others may come from secondary sources about the stakeholder or about the images discussed.A conclusion that highlights the main points and considers forward-thinking research ideas for research/actionA Works Cited page

Unformatted Attachment Preview

Don't use plagiarized sources. Get Your Custom Essay on
Expert Answer:Negative And Positive Effects of Video Gaming Visu
Just from $10/Page
Order Essay

Name 1
Greenpeace Against Nuclear Energy
Since the invention of the atomic bomb during WWII, nuclear energy has been a hot topic
of debate. On one hand, many organizations support nuclear energy because they believe that it
helps the world economy and the environment. These groups argue that nuclear power is a
sustainable source of energy, creates jobs, and produces no greenhouse gas emissions. However,
some organizations are concerned with the waste this energy creates. The waste gets buried inside
the Earth and contaminates nearby bodies of water, threatens the health of humans, and can
permanently damage the environment. Greenpeace International, an environmental activist
organization, does not support nuclear energy. Greenpeace believes that nuclear energy provides
an excuse not to use non-toxic, renewable energy sources, such as solar energy. The group adds
that nuclear energy creates waste that leaks under pipelines and can lead to a radioactive
meltdown, and even to a nuclear holocaust. Greenpeace International successfully supports its
argument to environmentalists worldwide that nuclear energy should be stopped through two
pieces of visual rhetoric that connect nuclear energy to death and destruction.
Greenpeace argues that nuclear energy should be stopped through the two images by
highlighting potential sources of nuclear waste. For instance, Image A shows a man holding a
Name 2
yellow sign that says, “Next Fukushima is your responsibility” (Ozkan). This quote refers to the
nuclear meltdown that happened in 2011. A massive tsunami hit Fukushima, Japan; one of the
city’s nuclear power plants exploded, and several people died (Funabashi, 9-10). This is an
example of kairos appeal, an appeal to time. According to Kendra Gayle Lee, Jessica McKee,
and Megan McIntyre, “Such references are prevalent in political and social campaigns,” and
demonstrate kairos rhetoric appeal (“Pathos,” 93). Greenpeace insinuates that this photograph
was taken in an area with a nuclear disaster, such as the one in Fukushima. There are gravestones
in the foreground with yellow and black circles symbolizing radioactive waste on them and
people who have died due to nuclear accidents. It also shows that nuclear waste is buried within
the ground. Image B shows a man holding a sign that says, “Stop nuclear now” (Greenpeace
International is protesting against nuclear energy on a beach in Africa). Behind him is yellow and
black tape that is used to enclose an area. This suggests that the entire area is contaminated with
radioactive materials. Bright yellow containers marked with the black and yellow circles lie in
the middle of the plot. This suggests the containers are filled with nuclear waste. Greenpeace uses
pathos rhetoric, an appeal to emotion, within both these images. According to Kendra Gayle
Lee, Jessica McKee, and Megan McIntyre, “When a writer uses images, songs, and other types of
nontextual media, he or she is often attempting to engage a reader’s emotions. Songs and pictures
produce emotional responses” (“Pathos,” 89). The symbols, such as the gravestones, are
supposed to make environmentalists fear human casualties of nuclear waste. Other images, such
as the barrels lying on top of the litter, make the audience fear the destruction of nuclear waste to
the environment. The sign in Image B also demonstrates kairos rhetoric appeal. According to
Kate Pantelides, Megan McIntyre, and Jessica McKee, “An appeal to some particular fastapproaching moment is often a rhetor’s attempt to create a perfect kairotic moment for his or her
Name 3
message by creating a sense of urgency” (“Kairos,” 93). The two signs create this “sense of
urgency” with their messages. Greenpeace effectively uses the bright yellow color, pathos
rhetoric, and kairos rhetoric to validate its argument through these images.
Furthermore, the settings of the images are another way Greenpeace successfully argues
that nuclear waste should be discontinued. Image A takes place in a city. The image shows ethos,
an appeal to ethic, because the Hagia Sophia is featured in the background. This timeless
monument was constructed to celebrate his victory against rioting peasants. Due to its historical
significance, the Hagia Sophia has authority. According to Megan McIntyre and Jessica McKee,
“When a candidate gives a speech in front of an American flag, he or she is associating him- or
herself with the symbol and borrowing the authority it represents” (“Ethos,” 84). Just as the
American flag’s credibility is borrowed, Greenpeace borrows this Turkish symbol. Generally,
places with these types of monuments are more populated, which makes people fear that a
nuclear explosion could happen within their own cities. The barren soil, dead trees, and deserted
setting all indicate that a disaster has already occurred. Image B takes place on the coastline and
symbolizes a nuclear disaster from an environmentalist perspective. The mounds of trash imply
that the nuclear waste has contaminated the land and, since the trash is near the water, the ocean.
Greenpeace is trying to tell its audience that scientists do not know what to do with the waste, so
the environment pays the consequence. Mounds of the waste have accumulated on the shoreline.
The waves symbolize the spread of waste through the ocean to other countries around the world.
All of these symbols use pathos rhetoric because they make people fear the contamination of
land, harming people in the cities, and spreading to other parts of the world. Due to the
differences in settings, Greenpeace is able to get its viewers to see the consequences of nuclear
waste both from a human and environmental perspective.
Name 4
Most importantly, Greenpeace International effectively argues nuclear energy should be
stopped because it dehumanizes the men within the images. Both of the men become objects
within the image and are displayed to shock the audience. The images both show men in white
protective jumpsuits that cover them from their head to feet. In image A, the man is wearing a
gas mask, which reveals that the air is too lethal to breathe. Image B shows a man wearing
protective gloves and a mask over his mouth. There is an icon on the subject’s suit that
Greenpeace created. It drew it as a yellow face screaming with its hands on its face. This
indicates that the men are representing or involved with Greenpeace. All of these symbols and
protective gear show the environmentalists that the area is uninhabitable for humans. The body
language of the men in both of the images is very intense. This indicates that the men are both
angry and wary about the presence of nuclear waste. Due to the subjects both being male, their
body language, and the protective clothing, these images target men that have jobs involving
physical labor. The images use pathos rhetoric because it causes the audiences to fear and hate
nuclear waste. Dehumanizing people in their image is a bold way Greenpeace International
points out the dangers of nuclear energy.
Greenpeace International has effectively argued that nuclear energy should cease by
showing images of danger and destruction. These images both highlight potential radioactive
hazards by using bright yellow colors, different settings to give the viewers a more broad
perspective of how nuclear waste effects the earth, and the dehumanization of people to illustrate
how dangerous the lethal material really is to humans. In the future, Greenpeace International
can achieve its goal: to end the use of nuclear energy. The organization is making the threats of
nuclear waste better known every year. Eventually, Greenpeace may get nuclear energy
outlawed. The organization helped ban dumping waste into the ocean in 1983, stopped Turkey’s
Name 5
plan to build ten nuclear reactors by 2020, and still is making an impact today (“Nuclear
Word Count: 1243
Name 6
Works Cited
Funabashi, Yoichi, and Kay Kitazawa. “Fukushima In Review: A Complex Disaster, A
Disastrous Response.” Bulletin Of The Atomic Scientists 68.2 (2012): 9-21. Academic
Search Premier. Web. 24 Jan. 2015. <>
Greenpeace International is protesting against nuclear energy on the beach in Africa. Digital
image. Greenpeace. Greenpeace Africa, 2014. Web. 9 Feb. 2015.
Jarus, By Owen. “Hagia Sophia: Facts, History & Architecture.” LiveScience. TechMedia
Network, 01 Mar. 2013. Web. 22 Jan. 2015. <>.
McIntyre, Megan, and Jessica McKee. “Ethos: Appeals to Authority and Credibility.” Ed. Jason
Carabelli. Rhetoric Matters: Language and Argument in Context. Ed. Brogan Sullivan.
Tampa: U of South Florida, 2014. 1-253. Print.
McIntyre, Megan, Kate Pantelides, Kate, and Jessica McKee. “Kairos: Appeals to Timeliness.”
Rhetoric Matters: Language and Argument in Context. Ed. Jason Carabelli and Brogan
Sullivan. Tampa: U of South Florida, 2014. 1-253. Print.
McKee, Jessica, and Megan McIntyre. “Pathos: Appeals to Emotion.” Rhetoric Matters:
Language and Argument in Context. By Kendra G. Lee. Ed. Jason Carabelli and Brogan
Sullivan. Tampa: U of South Florida, 2014. 1-238. Print.
Name 7
“No New Nukes.” Greenpeace. Greenpeace, 1 Jan. 2014. Web. 9 Feb. 2015.
“Nuclear Victories.” Greenpeace. Greenpeace, 1 Jan. 2014. Web. 9 Feb. 2015.
Ozkan, Caner. Activists from Greenpeace Turkey protest in front of the Hagia Sofia.
2013. Digital image. Greenpeace Blogs RSS. Greenpeace, n.d. Web. 9 Feb. 2015.
Name 8
Image A
Name 9
Image B

Purchase answer to see full

Place your order
(550 words)

Approximate price: $22

Calculate the price of your order

550 words
We'll send you the first draft for approval by September 11, 2018 at 10:52 AM
Total price:
The price is based on these factors:
Academic level
Number of pages
Basic features
  • Free title page and bibliography
  • Unlimited revisions
  • Plagiarism-free guarantee
  • Money-back guarantee
  • 24/7 support
On-demand options
  • Writer’s samples
  • Part-by-part delivery
  • Overnight delivery
  • Copies of used sources
  • Expert Proofreading
Paper format
  • 275 words per page
  • 12 pt Arial/Times New Roman
  • Double line spacing
  • Any citation style (APA, MLA, Chicago/Turabian, Harvard)

Our guarantees

Delivering a high-quality product at a reasonable price is not enough anymore.
That’s why we have developed 5 beneficial guarantees that will make your experience with our service enjoyable, easy, and safe.

Money-back guarantee

You have to be 100% sure of the quality of your product to give a money-back guarantee. This describes us perfectly. Make sure that this guarantee is totally transparent.

Read more

Zero-plagiarism guarantee

Each paper is composed from scratch, according to your instructions. It is then checked by our plagiarism-detection software. There is no gap where plagiarism could squeeze in.

Read more

Free-revision policy

Thanks to our free revisions, there is no way for you to be unsatisfied. We will work on your paper until you are completely happy with the result.

Read more

Privacy policy

Your email is safe, as we store it according to international data protection rules. Your bank details are secure, as we use only reliable payment systems.

Read more

Fair-cooperation guarantee

By sending us your money, you buy the service we provide. Check out our terms and conditions if you prefer business talks to be laid out in official language.

Read more

Order your essay today and save 30% with the discount code ESSAYSHELP