Tow#16 : Gay-Baiting Before the Olympics

This article is about Russian President, Vladimir Putin's view on homosexuality. There is big controversy whether he is going to be a good host or a "homophobic scold." This controversy has come up because the Winter Olympics are approaching next month in Sochi. The purpose of this article is to show Putin's views.

The writers of this editorial are from the New York editorial board and they are very credible because the editorial board is composed of various journalists who have different areas of expertise.

This editorial has various rhetorical devices such as allusions to President Vladimir Putin and what he says which is very juxtaposing to each other, "You can feel relaxed and calm, but please, leave the children alone." This is what the President of Russia said in his speech directed at the Gay community and this shows juxtaposition because in the first part he is welcoming them and telling them to feel relaxed, but then he is telling them to be cautious and leave the children alone. This is terrible because he is not making the Gay community feel welcome, and while there are other customs and traditions in Russia, no one should be discriminated against and people should be free to be who they want. Also when he states "We do not have a ban on nontraditional sexual relationships, we have a ban on the propaganda of homosexuality and pedophilia," this is kind of ironic because he is saying that Russia does not have any laws against homosexuals, only the propaganda. This is ironic because if he states that he has no problems with homosexuals, then he should not have problems with the spread of homosexuality.

Honestly, after reading this editorial I was shocked. Both of my parents grew up in Russia and the values and morals my parents have are nothing like this. I did not even know Russia's take on homosexuality and it is completely disgusting to me. As for their purpose, the editors achieved it. They have proven to me how awful and disgusting Vladimir Putin really is. 

Tow #15: Zero Tolerance, Reconsidered

This editorial that I read was about schools all over the country rethinking this concept of "zero tolerance" where students are suspended, expelled, and even arrested for minor offenses such as cursing. I think that this is really relevant because this is actually happening in the country and it is relevant to me because I am still in high school.
The purpose of this article was to really harp on the fact that these harsh punishments bring no good and do not help change the aura of the school, but rather they cause delayed education for the offenders and also they cause them to have a permanent or juvenile record which hurts them in their future when they are trying to be successful.
This was written by the editors of the New York Times and they are very credible because the NYTimes editorial board is constructed of a wide variety of journalists.
I think that this editorial does use a nice variety of rhetorics such as unarguable data with providing facts of policies that congress has made about these laws in school. They provide a good cause and effect of what happens if these kids are suspended and expelled. They provide a research study which really shows the affect that these charges have on a student and it shows that they do not bring anything pleasant.
I really liked this editorial because it really got to the point and provided examples and had a lot of cause and effect reasoning which really helps you see the problem and what should be done about it.

Tow #14

The editorial I just read was called "The New Year Within." It's context is very current because we just welcomed 2014 and wished a farwell to 2013. This editorial talks about the New Year and everyone's hopes for a change. However it distinctly points out that this new change that we all long for is something we can do everyday. I think the purpose of this really was to welcome the New Year and also encourage people to achieve the change they want and not waste a "new year."

The writers of this editorial are very credible because they are on the New York Times editorial board which consists of a variety of well-rounded journalists.

This editorial uses many rhetorical devices such as allusions and references to people such as Henry David Thoreau which makes this editorial seem credible. This editorial also uses symbolism to refer to the cold and dead winter not being a season for rebirth. However, then it talks about the symbolism of nature and how it will emerge from the cold for rebirth in the spring. This editorial really is kind of philosophical, welcoming the New Year and really encouraging people to initiate change while explaining how to welcome the new year. It says that there is no proper way and everyone does it in their own way.

I personally didn't really like this editorial all that much because I thought it could have more depth in really explaining how to initiate change in the New Year. I think these editors could have done better.