The issue of “achieving a significant reduction in the rate of biodiversity loss” as a part of the commitment made in 2002 raises concern regarding “how well have we done?” Reviewing progress towards achieving this target at the 2010 International Biodiversity conference, speaker Chris Lee approaches his audience, including attendees involved in the area of nature conservation, in a rather accusatory yet a disapproving tone. While complementing the two, Lee also employs an alarmist tone to contend that rapid action must be taken “before it is too late.” The use of visuals through his opening and closing slides enable Lee to deliver his argument through another medium.
- your opening sentence is clunky and doesn't really engage the reader. Try something like "ongoing commitments to improving the "rate of biodiversity loss" sees Chris Lee review progress made towards this target. I see what you tried to do, but I don't think it was all that well executed
- Your sentence about audience is somewhat long winded. Try "As Lee is addressing those at the 2010 International Biodiversity conference, it is a given that the majority of his audience are concerned with progress in the conservation of nature". You'd then go onto to discussing why this is significant - don't just leave it hanging.
- I also think you need to make the contention clearer
By indicating the “vital significance” of “this year” Lee aims to draw his audiences’ attention to the importance of their presence at the conference itself. Lee focuses his audiences' attention to the "vital significance" of maintaining biodiversity. Lee's use of.... (this is where you'd discuss how he does this and the impact. This you then set you up to discuss his tone) Furthermore, his alarmist tone,
accompanying his introduction, carries along a warning for the attendees, indicating the
reality check - careful of colloquial language terms unless you're quoting the article that
is to compliment his speech.
It is prior to presenting any of his arguments that Lee immediately highlights his presence as part of the audience, by stating the “value of biodiversity in our lives.”
I feel like you're missing a sentence here. Talk about the emphasis and the importance that Lee places on having biodiversity and how this needs to be maintainedBy doing so, he is able to reassure his audience that
its not a particular group, but everyone
that is to be blamed for the “thoughtless human actions,”
yet it is also everyone that and everyone is response for taking action to "reverse the negative trend." must take action to “reverse the negative trend.” This encourages readers to understand how a shared effort is needed to maintain biodiversity, as it is too large of an issue for an individual to solely handle Lee further extends upon the idea of an inclusive approach towards the solution by indicating that “we will….strengthen our goals,” while connoting a positive future amongst the audience. this sentence doesn't really reveal anything about how the language is used. I feel as though you've memorised "inclusive approach" and then used it because you understand that "we" is an example of inclusive languageIntroducing his argument of “thoughtless human actions” causing the “loss of species at a faster rate than they can evolve,” Lee continues his
alarmist - I know you've already discussed this but how does an alarmist approach then link with the use of statistics?? approach towards his audience, and employs the use of statistics from the IUCN. Referencing a major organisation in context of his speech, the use of statistics
adds credibility to his argument once again, this is a "memorised effect". Like yeah, sure it does add credibility but what does it do in context of the article? while allowing Lee to approach the attendees’ sense of justice for the “already extinct” species.
By bluntly highlighting that “it is too late for them,” the speaker bids to appeal to the audience’s moral values, and further extend
ing upon this idea,
the audience can come to understand how there is still time for action to preserve the remaining biodiversity - I like this bit .
By doing so, the audience is compelled to ponder upon their actions in the “sad….past.” As a result of this, listeners are encouraging to act in a positive manner in the current to seek to prevent greater biodiversity loss Shifting onto a rather accusatory one, Lee further attacks his audiences’ “lack of unity” in leading “us to a grim situation,” however, accompanying his accusation is his choice of inclusiveness with his audience
that again reassures them that everyone is to be held responsible for the “environmental degradation. - where possible, try to avoid repeating ideas. There is so much more in this article you could be discussing!” The speaker further acknowledges his audiences’ status as being “the most educated generation of any to date,” hence implying that there is “no excuse for inaction.” While appealing to their
honourable presence in such a way, Lee juxtaposes his “economic(ally) giant” viewers to the “poor….vulnerable” communities, and simultaneously appeals to their sense of justice for the less fortunate that depend on biodiversity “for survival.” The attack and juxtaposition, in conjunction with emphasis upon “you (audience)”, bid to cause the attendees to feel ashamed of their inaction,
hence further reiterating Lee’s contention of a “need to change.” - this is superficialWhile panning back to his
alarmist tone - to effective track tone shifts, look at how tone varies over a piece. Don't come back to the same tone unless it's the nature of the article, Lee colloquially indicates to his audience that they must stop “kidding themselves” and take action before it is too late.
consider the choice of "kidding" --> it has connotations of childish behaviour and is thereby associated with innocence and lack of knowledge. This could act as a call to action for the audience to recognise the need to act now before it is too late.This accompanies his argument of “taking serious action from now onwards” while the speaker continues the juxtaposition of the “1.1 billion people….in poverty” as opposed to “us….in the comfort of an air-conditioner.” Through the constant juxtaposition of the poor and the rich, Lee’s audience is able to understand their importance in the community as the one’s “responsible for it,”
furthermore, they are inclined to feel involved in taking “serious action” in order to preserve the biodiversity. that sentence in red didn't really add anymore depth to what you have already said Lee also employs the use of a visual representing the world in the hands of a human, which, by summarizing the presentation enhances the ideal of humanities’ responsibility and impact upon biodiversity through depicting the globe resting in
our human hands.
This image creates the sensation that we control the well-being and future of the world inspiring an overwhelming sense of responsibility thereby positioning the reader to aspire to treat in with greater respect..
By adopting constant tone shifts and employing a range of different appeals throughout his presentation, Lee summarises the importance of “our” action in order to “prevent the loss of biodiversity,” and while doing so, his “educated” audience is departed with a greater sense of appreciation for their access. Simultaneously, while the speaker utilises a range of different persuasive techniques to deliver his contention, his audience is inclined to be convinced by his arguments, and is further urged to take serious action. Not to sound harsh, but I strongly dislike how you have ended your analysis. I feel as though you've been too broad and summarised the article in one paragraph. To end the analysis, I would have taken the quote from Einser and explained how this last line of the speech makes the impact of the impact more profound as it also features in the image. - try structuring your analysis based around reoccurring strategies/concepts. This forces you to look at the entirety of the article instead of progressing in a sort of chronological manner
- I feel as though you do have a grasp on the intended impact of techniques, but these have been sort of regurgitated instead of applied to this text. Section C is not purely a task about how many definitions and intended impacts about techniques you can recall. It is about scrutinising and analysing language use and the effect it has on the reader
- your paragraphs were somewhat short
- make sure you plan before you begin to write
- If there is more than one image, I would strongly suggest analysing both images. There was so much to look at in the first image, I'm surprised you ignored it (especially given it is the opening slide and is the logo of the conference.)
I hope you take this advice not too harshly. Best of luck