Running Head: DEATH PENALTY

The Death Penalty: Is it Lethal Justice?

Alexandria Zamora




English 1312
May 11, 2014
























DEATH PENALTY 2
The death penalty is a very controversial topic due to the different believes people
have. Some argue the death penalty is a just form of capital punishment while others find
it unethical and a barbaric from of punishment. A New York Times article Does Death
Penalty Save Lives? A new Debate by Adam Liptak will be compared and contrasted to
a YouTube video Wash. Governor Suspends Death Penalty Cites, Flaws by Richard
Fowler. The genres, typographical (article) and iconographical (video), play an important
role on the audience, purpose, structure and delivery. The New York Times article is not
biased and presents the audience with different points of view and evidence that guide the
reader on deciding where they stand on the debate. The video by Richard Fowler is
biased and his purpose is to convince the audience that the death penalty is not ethical
due to the flaws that exists in our judicial system. The differences in these genres provide
the reader with different points of view and issues that take place on the subject of the
death penalty.
Both genres are geared towards a mature audience that understand the severity of
the death penalty. In the article the title Does Death Penalty Save Lives? A new Debate
foreshadows that the reader will ultimately take their individual stance on the debate. The
reader is going to read about the debate and possibly become neutral, against, or for the
death penalty. Therefore the purpose of this article is to provide the audience with logos,
ethos, and pathos to inform and give the reader the freedom to decide their own opinion
on the death penalty. In YouTube video by Richard Fowler the purpose is to convince the
audience that the death penalty should be suspended due to the flaws and injustices in our
judicial system. Examples of injustices taken place in death penalty cases are provided
DEATH PENALTY 3
and the governor of Washington, Jay Inslee is a source that supports the argument. The
Governor of Washington suspended the death penalty in his state because,
Equal justice under law is the states primary responsibility and in death penalty
cases I am not convinced equal justice has been served. There are too many flaws
in the system and when the ultimate decision of death is too much and theres too
much at steak to accept an imperfect system. (Fowler).

This statement carries a lot of weight and is geared to convince the audience against the
death penalty for ethical and logical reasons. Both genres discuss a very controversial
topic, the death penalty, and cover ethos, logos, and pathos as their proofs. However, the
purpose of the genres differentiate because one is more informative compared to a
biased genre that strongly tries to convince the audience to be against the death penalty.
New York Times article Does Death Penalty Save Lives? A new Debate is
formal and strongly influenced the way the article was written. Its written in a
professional manner and is very clear to the reader. Pathos is present but does not
dominate the tone because it is more informative. On the other hand, YouTube video
Wash. Governor Suspends Death Penalty Cites, Flaws is biased and utilizes pathos
and ethos more to convince the audience to be against the death penalty. YouTube video
is less formal than the article because Richard Fowler presents the information in a more
personal level. Facts and evidence are provided which support his argument making it
creditable but the discussion is less formal compared to the written New York Times
article. The video is meant to be semi-formal because he has a blog on political issues,
which is his style of presenting his argument to an audience.
DEATH PENALTY 4

The article is structured to be informative and has two sides because it is a debate
that goes back and fourth discussing the argument. It has the structure of a presidential
debate where an argument is presented and another argument challenges it. The delivery
of the article is clear and formal. The audience is not left with questions or doubts
because its mostly informative. The YouTube video strongly tries to convince the
audience that the death penalty is unethical. The structure of the video begins with the
main source, the governor of Washington State Jay Inslee and his actions to suspend the
death penalty. Giving examples of death penalty cases that prove our judicial system is
flawed is developed. There are images of a deathbed with straps, which gives the
audience an image of the setting of a death penalty case in action. The video closes with a
solution, which is to suspend the death penalty until our judicial system is not flawed.
The structure and delivery of both genres are very different but present a good and
creditable argument.

The genres are very different in nature and therefore it reflects on the purpose,
structure, and delivery. The genres target the same audience but have different purposes.
Overall, both articles are informative to the audience but have different intentions and
execution. The reader is provided with facts and examples on the pros and cons of the
death penalty, which stimulates personal opinions on the subject, making the audience
think.


DEATH PENALTY 5


Sources

Adam Liptak. (2007, November 18). Does Death Penalty Save Lives? A New Debate.

New York Times, p.11.

Richard Fowler. (2014, February 16). Washington Governor Suspends Death Penalty,
Cites Flaws http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OQXkQ0uz6OA