Introduction
Gun violence has always been a major public health concern in the United States, with more than 39,000 gun-related deaths in 2019 alone. However, the COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated the problem, with reports of increased gun violence in several cities. This essay will compare and analyze the persuasive strategies used by two articles that address the topic of gun violence during the COVID-19 pandemic. The articles are “Gun violence during COVID-19 pandemic: paradoxical trends in New York City, Chicago, Los Angeles and Baltimore” by Sutherland et al. (2021) and “Gun violence incidence during the COVID-19 pandemic is higher than before the pandemic in the United States” by Ssentongo et al. (2021).
Contextual Factors
When analysing their persuasive strategies, the context in which these articles were written is important. The COVID-19 pandemic has had a significant impact on the United States, not just in terms of public health but also economically, politically, and socially. The pandemic has exposed and exacerbated pre-existing inequalities in American society, including disparities in access to healthcare, education, and employment. The pandemic has also coincided with a surge in civil unrest and political polarization in the United States. These factors have undoubtedly influenced the authors and their audiences.
Rhetorical strategies
The use of rhetorical strategies by the authors Sutherland et al. (2021) and Ssentongo et al. (2021) effectively engage and persuade their respective audiences. Both articles make use of logos, ethos, and pathos to varying degrees, and these strategies are influenced by the context in which the articles were written.
The COVID-19 pandemic is an important contextual factor that has influenced both the authors and the audience of these articles. The pandemic has had wide-ranging effects on society, including economic stress, social isolation, and an increase in mental health problems. Both articles cite these factors as potential reasons for the increase in gun violence during the pandemic. The audience for these articles is likely to include healthcare professionals, policymakers, and the general public, who are all affected by the pandemic and may be more receptive to arguments that address the pandemic and its impact on society.
The historical, political, and cultural factors that influence American society are also important to consider when analyzing the rhetorical strategies used by these authors. Gun violence has long been a contentious issue in the United States, with debates over gun control and the Second Amendment frequently making headlines. The authors of both articles are likely aware of this context and may be influenced by it in their choice of persuasive strategies. For example, the authors may choose to appeal to emotions such as fear or anger in order to gain support for their arguments, given the emotional nature of the gun control debate.
Target Audience
The target audience for both articles is likely to be a mix of healthcare professionals, policymakers, and the general public. However, the articles may appeal to different subsets of this audience. Sutherland et al. (2021) may be more appealing to healthcare professionals and policymakers, as it presents data on gun violence trends in specific cities and offers potential explanations for these trends. Ssentongo et al. (2021) may be more appealing to the general public, as it presents data on gun violence incidence in the United States as a whole and suggests that the pandemic may be contributing to this increase.
Persuasive Strategies
Both articles use a combination of logos, ethos, and pathos to persuade their audiences. However, the effectiveness of these strategies varies between the two articles.
- Sutherland et al. (2021)
Logos: Sutherland et al. (2021) rely heavily on logos to persuade their audience. The article presents data on gun violence trends in four major cities during the pandemic, including graphs and charts that illustrate these trends. The authors also offer potential explanations for these trends, such as the closure of schools and community centres and the economic impact of the pandemic. This use of logos is effective in making a logical argument for why gun violence may have increased during the pandemic.
Ethos: The authors of Sutherland et al. (2021) establish their credibility by citing previous research on gun violence and public health. They also acknowledge the limitations of their own study and offer suggestions for future research. This use of ethos effectively establishes the authors as experts in their field and increases the credibility of their argument.
Pathos: Sutherland et al. (2021) use pathos sparingly but effectively. The authors describe the impact of gun violence on the communities they studied, such as the increase in trauma cases and deaths. This use of pathos effectively appeals to the audience’s emotions and emphasises the urgency of addressing the problem of gun violence during the pandemic.
- Ssentongo et al. (2021)
Logos: Ssentongo et al. (2021) also rely heavily on logos to persuade their audience. The article presents data on gun violence incidence in the United States before and during the pandemic, including graphs and charts that illustrate this data. The authors also suggest potential reasons for the increase in gun violence during the pandemic, such as economic stress and social isolation. This use of logos is effective in making a logical argument for why gun violence may have increased during the pandemic.
Ethos: The authors of Ssentongo et al. (2021) establish their credibility by citing previous research on gun violence and public health, as well as the expertise of the organizations that provided the data for their study. This use of ethos effectively establishes the authors as experts in their field and increases the credibility of their argument.
Pathos: Ssentongo et al. (2021) use pathos less frequently than Sutherland et al. (2021). However, the authors do describe the impact of gun violence on individuals and communities, such as the trauma caused by witnessing or experiencing gun violence. This use of pathos effectively appeals to the audience’s emotions and emphasises the human cost of gun violence during the pandemic.
Comparison of Persuasive Strategies
Both articles use a combination of logos, ethos, and pathos to persuade their audiences. However, the two articles have some differences in the effectiveness of these strategies.
Logos: Both articles rely heavily on logos to logically argue why gun violence may have increased during the pandemic. However, Sutherland et al. (2021) are more effective in this regard, as the authors present data on gun violence trends in specific cities and offer potential explanations for these trends. Ssentongo et al. (2021), on the other hand, present data on gun violence incidence in the United States as a whole, which may be less compelling to some audiences.
Ethos: Both articles establish the credibility of their authors through citations of previous research and expert organizations. However, Sutherland et al. (2021) are more effective in this regard, as the authors acknowledge the limitations of their own study and offer suggestions for future research. This increases the credibility of their argument and positions them as experts who are willing to engage in ongoing research on the topic.
Pathos: Both articles use pathos to appeal to the emotions of their audiences and emphasize the human cost of gun violence during the pandemic. However, Sutherland et al. (2021) are more effective in this regard, as the authors describe the impact of gun violence on the communities they studied and present specific examples of the trauma and deaths caused by gun violence during the pandemic.
Conclusion
Both Sutherland et al. (2021) and Ssentongo et al. (2021) use a combination of logos, ethos, and pathos to persuade their audiences of the urgent need to address gun violence during the COVID-19 pandemic. While both articles effectively use persuasive strategies, there are some differences in their effectiveness. Sutherland et al. (2021) are more effective in their use of pathos and logos as it presents data on gun violence trends in specific cities and describes the impact of gun violence on communities. Ssentongo et al. (2021) effectively use ethos and logos, as it establishes the credibility of the authors and presents data on gun violence incidence in the United States as a whole. The context in which these articles were written, including the COVID-19 pandemic and the social and political factors that have influenced American society, is important to consider when analyzing their persuasive strategies. The target audience for both articles is likely to be a mix of healthcare professionals, policymakers, and the general public, and the articles may appeal to different subsets of this audience. Overall, both articles make a compelling case for the need to address gun violence during the COVID-19 pandemic, and their use of persuasive strategies effectively engages and persuades their respective audiences.
Works Cited
Sutherland, Mason, Mark McKenney, and Adel Elkbuli. “Gun violence during COVID-19 pandemic: paradoxical trends in New York city, Chicago, Los Angeles and Baltimore.” The American journal of emergency medicine 39 (2021): 225.
Ssentongo, Paddy, et al. “Gun violence incidence during the COVID-19 pandemic is higher than before the pandemic in the United States.” Scientific reports 11.1 (2021): 20654.
write