This assignment draws on Chapters 2 and 3 of Social Problems (Best 2017) to analyze the rhetoric used by an activist group associated with the condition you have chosen. First, you will choose one claimsmaker group and analyze a specific claims made by the activist group. Then, you will identify and analyze opponents of the claim.
The objective of this assignment is to develop familiarity in applying the concepts related to claims: grounds, warrants, and conclusions. You will also evaluate the expected opponent(s) and audience of a claim. This assignment will also help you think more carefully about the role of activists and social movement organizations in the social problems process.
You will gain familiarity identifying when a group is making an argument. You will also be able to identify the grounds and warrants for their argument. Thinking about your sources in light of the distinction between insider and outsider claimsmakers will help you consider the need for a range of sources.
Look at your list of sources from your annotated bibliography in Assignment 1. Separate the following categories using subheadings on the original Annotated Bibliography page. Sources should still be alphabetical within each subsection.
Identify those which you believe to have been authored by activists. Think about other activist groups that are likely to have an interest in your condition and search for information on them and their involvement with the condition. Add these new sources to your bibliography and create a new section that is labeled “Activists.” Move all those sources you have identified as activist authored to that section. You’ll now have your general list that contains all the sources you feel are authored by "Other" and another that is just for the activists. Note that generally, academic articles published in peer-reviewed journals are not considered activist sources (we will learn more about these "expert" sources next).
Extinction Rebellion. n.d. “Climate And Ecological Emergency (Declaration, Emissions Target And Citizens Assembly) Bill.”
Assembly bill for U.K. proposed by activist organization Extinction Rebellion.
Weyler, Rex. 2019. “The Youth Have Seen Enough.” Greenpeace.
News article authored by journalist in activist organization describing recent school strikes for climate change.
Oreskes, Naomi. 2004. “The Scientific Consensus on Climate Change.” Science.
Academic article on current climate change science.
Wallace-Wells, David. 2017. “The Uninhabitable Earth, Annotated Edition.” New York Magazine.
Magazine article laying out current understanding of scientific details about the future of climate change.
Warner, Keith Douglass and David DeCosse. n.d. “Lesson Five: Environmental Justice.” A Short Course in Environmental Ethics. Markkula Center for Applied Ethics.
Web site lesson on environmental justice from an academic institute.
Make a new page of your website titled “Activists.”
Tasks 2 and 3 of this assignment should be clearly separated using headings. You may also use subheadings for the claim's grounds, warrants, and conclusion, if you like.
Your analysis (Tasks 2 and 3) should be approximately 500-750 words total.
First, you will analyze a particular claim made by an activist claimsmaking group. Choose an activist claimsmaker group from your annotated bibliography that you would like to focus on. The self-description of the claimsmaking group may portray them in a variety of ways: as those who have been personal victims of a social problem, as highly motivated champions and protectors of those suffering from a social problem, as effective participants who get results and make a difference, as liberals or progressives or conservatives, as religious or nonreligious, as citizens or patriots, as the voice of the common people, and so on. Examining the self-description of the claimsmaking group will help you identify what types of grounds the group uses to describe the condition.
Identify a claim from your group about the condition you have chosen.
Identify the claim’s grounds (what's the problem?), warrants (why should you care?), and conclusions (what should be done?). Employ the terminology we are learning in class. (For example, do the claim’s grounds include typifying examples, names, and statistics? How are they are used more and less effectively?)
Analyze how the claim might fare in the social problems marketplace. What might make it more appealing to certain audiences?
Make at least 2 suggestions for how one of the claims can be modified to make it more effective. Include any cultural resources the claimsmakers might draw on. (Be sure to add any new sources you use for this assignment to your annotated bibliography.)
As you examine the self-description of the group, note statements about other groups that are seen as friends or allies. On websites, this usually appears in the form of links to other sites. You should include some of these in your discussion. (For instance, Ralph Nader’s Public Citizen Website might have a link to the site of an environmental group such as the Natural Resources Defense Fund.)
After considering the self-description of the advocacy group and its stated identification with other friends and allies, you should look at statements describing opponents of the group. What terms are applied to those on the other side of the issue? Are they portrayed as selfish interest groups, extreme conservatives or extreme liberals, irrational advocates unable to accept the plain truth, hypocrites, ineffective advocates who don’t get results, front groups for other vested interests, unscientific groups, religious extremists or irreligious people who do not respect the sacred, and so on? Select some quotations from the materials you find as your evidence, in order to demonstrate how the group portrays its opponents.
Strong assignments will:
Use evidence to back up your arguments;
Clearly explain using plain language; and
Draw a conclusion based on evidence.
Instructions for peer review for this assignment are located here:
In-person classes