Blackburn

RC 1000
Rhetorical Analysis—Peer Review Guidelines
Answer these questions and mirror back to your peer what you find in her/his
rhetorical analysis essay.

Reviewer: Nate Stone

Writer: Noel Seversky

1. Is the primary source related to the theme of this course, is it a digital text,
and is it properly cited in the essay and in the Works Cited page?
- The primary source is related to the theme, with the product being
Coca-cola. It is a youtube video, which aligns with digital text. The
works cited page needs to be added.

2. Is the rhetorical analysis formatted using either MLA convention, double

spaced, 12 pt. font, and the required page length?
- The analysis is checking off the boxes with it’s MLA format, yet could
use some more beef as it is just under 3 pages.

3. Respond to the essay’s structure and its analysis of rhetorical appeals and
logical fallacies:
- The essay has a good, classic structure with an introduction, body, and
conclusion. The rhetorical appeals are present and relate to the essay
as a whole. The fallacies are clearly represented in the artifact.

4. Discuss the essay’s introductory elements.​ Does your peer introduce the
text, its source, and its rhetorical situation?
- My peer does a great job of getting the meat of the introduction
covered, by informing the reader of what the text is, where it comes
from, and what it is trying to do.

5. Does your peer tell the reader the purpose of the artifact, its target audience,
and its goals?
- Yes. The goals of the artifact are clearly stated. Who the target
audience isn’t stated as much, and could use some enhancing.

6. Does your peer address include a brief summary of the artifact?

- Yes, the opening paragraph contains a short and sweet summary of
the artifact and what it is trying to do.

7. Does your peer address the rhetorical situation and the context(s) of the
artifact—social, political, historical, cultural?
 - Cultural is mentioned, but not necessarily described in depth. Some
more attention to this part may help.

8. What type of genre is this artifact (e.g., PSA, commercial, propaganda, etc?)
- The genre is a commercial, which is known to be stronger in getting a
message across as it allows for more time to persuade.

9. What is your peer’s attitude toward the artifact, its subject, and audience?
- My peer personally feels very strongly towards the subject, as she is a
huge advocate for the product being displayed in the commercial.

10. Does your peer analyze the authorities relied upon in the artifact in order to
appeal to the target audience or to make an argument?
- Yes she does. In the rhetorical analysis, my peer addresses and
analyzes the authorities that the commercial uses to draw in the
audience. Some of these authorities are a very emotional appeal that
coca cola brings happiness, duplication of sentences to burn these
words into the minds of the audience, and the increase of intensity
throughout the video to increase the excitement and attention of the
audience.

11. Does your peer identify the artifact’s intended audience? How does your peer
know?
- My peer addresses the commercials intended audience in the first
paragraph. My peer states that the target audience are people who
watch the Superbowl, as this commercial initially aired during this
program, and also states that the audience is mostly 20-50 year olds
who can buy coca cola for themselves. My peer knows this as the
commercial showed people between the ages of 20-50 enjoying the
refreshing coca cola.

12. Does your peer discuss what the artifact assumes its audience knows and
what it needs to know in order for the text to work?
- My peer doesn’t necessarily address what the artifact assumes it’s
audience knows or what it needs to know, but they do talk about how
the artifact makes the audience feel and think that the feeling one gets
when they taste coca cola is fantastic and something that the audience
must do.

13. Does your peer examine the information, arguments, reasons, evidence, data,
and structure of the artifact?
- Yes. My peer effectively examines all things mentioned. They talk
about the motive of the artifact, what it includes, why they do what
they do, and the evidence to back it up.
14. Does your peer analyze ​Rhetorical Appeals​ and use specific examples from
the text when analyzing the rhetorical appeals?
- Yes they do. My peer has listed three examples of rhetorical devices
that are used in the commercial, and list the examples and techniques
used of each one.
15. Ethos.​ Does your peer explain the integrity and background of the artifact’s
source and how that influences the text’s overall effectiveness.
- My peer addressed ethos on a minimal level, describing how coca cola
itself isn’t necessarily a very healthy drink, yet the commercial
advertises the drink as being very refreshing and showing inshape
people drinking it. This can hurt the credibility of the company by
showing they are lacking intelligence on the nutritional aspect.

16. Does your peer consider if this artifact credible and trustworthy? Why?
- My peer does not consider this artifact to be credible in the taste of
the product, but not the nutritional harm it causes to people that the
commercial fails to explain.

17. Does your peer seem aware of the artifact’s bias?

- Yes, my peer seems very aware of the bias, as they address the lack of
information and trustworthiness from the commercial. There is
complete bias present in the commercial and explained in the
analysis.

18. Pathos.​ Does your peer address the emotional appeals within the text and
how they influence the text’s overall effectiveness?
- Yes. My peer addresses how the artifact uses personal satisfaction of
the people in the commercial to create an emotional appeal within the
audience.

19. Does your peer address the emotions the artifact appeals to and if these
emotional appeals effective? If so, for whom?
- Yes. My peer analyses and describes the emotional appeals in the
commercial and how they work. They mention their success as Coca
Cola is a successful company. They talk about how these appeals are
effective for the audience and all who are able to enjoy a Coca Cola.
20. Logos.​ Does your peer describe the logical appeals within the artifact and
how they influence the text’s overall effectiveness?
- Yes. My peer describes these appeals when talking about the
duplication of the sentences within the commercial. They explain
what is happening then give reason as to why it is occuring.

21. What logic, reason, facts, statistics are presented?

- My peer presents logic and reason all throughout the essay. They
present logic when talking about logos and they explain reason when
 talking about why the company and commercial uses these certain
techniques.

22. What evidence is used to convince the audience?

- The evidence that is used to convince the audience is the satisfaction
that is shown by the actors during the commercial. They are seen to
be very happy and enjoying their day all because of Coca Cola.

23. Logical Fallacies. ​Does your peer address logical fallacies found in the
artifact?
- My peer addresses the fallacies present in the commercial. They talk
about sentimental appeals as Coca Cola shows the audience their
actors having a great time and they tend towards the bandwagon
appeal by showing multiple people drinking Coca Cola.

24. How many logical fallacies are explored by your peer?

- My peer explores certain fallacies such as the bandwagon fallacy and
the false authority fallacy.

25. What conclusions can you as the reader draw based on your peer’s analysis
of the text?
- As the reader, I can conclude that this essay effectively analyses the
commercial by Coca Cola. This essay picks apart the rhetorical devices
used and how they work. It explains the reasoning behind each fallacy
and the effect it plays on how the message is perceived by the
audience.

26. Does your peer cite specific examples to back up claims of fallacies in the
text?
- Yes, my peer uses examples for each rhetorical analysis mentioned.
They could be more specific on the exact examples that were present
in the commercial, but overall they met the requirements.