The pages of the Aims of Argument I read were an introduction to the deeper meaning of what argument and rhetoric are, in regards to what the rest of the textbook will be explaining.

Argument is described by most as a verbal combat, but it can have a much more in depth meaning. It can refer to reasoned arguments between others when discussing or conducting business. When arguments have good reasoning and evidence, problems can be worked out and compromises can be reached. Argument can be better defined as reasoned thinking.

Rhetoric also has a common negative meaning to most, and is often used to describe empty promises. In reality, rhetoric has a much more positive definition. Since the Ancient Greek era, rhetoric has been defined as speaking with persuasion. In old history, passionate speeches and persuasion were very popular, from Greek scholars to political speeches.

Allentuck, Danielle, and Kevin Draper. “With Fewer Fans in the Seats, Teams Offer a Place to Stand.” New York Times, 30 Sept. 2019, p. D7(L). Gale In Context: Opposing Viewpoints, https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A601197743/OVIC?u=ucinc_main&sid=OVIC&xid=b5c66f91. Accessed 12 Mar. 2020.

This article discusses a new plan some MLB teams have begun using to try to get more fans in the stadium. The 12 year slide in attendance had led to teams desperate to try anything to put fans in the stadium. The article quotes one fan from New York, who had begun attending Mets games ona standing room only pass. This is the new way for teams to sell tickets. Standing room passes amount to very low prices for each game, and the only downside is there isn’t a seat for these fans. Teams hope this will engage younger fans to but these passes, similar to how they pay for netflix or amazon.

This source is a very good resource. It’s a very long article, and has quite a few quotes from higher ups for teams. It includes their statements and thoughts, and it’s very helpful for my argument. My opinion and the opinion of the author is very similar to the state of baseball. I think this article could be one of my main sources.

Reflecting on the source I believe this will be one of my most important sources. I will quote a lot from this article, and it’s new enough to be relevant while reiterating everything I’m arguing.

“Political cartoon: MLB has an attendance problem with or without coronavirus.” Philadelphia Inquirer [Philadelphia, PA], 6 Mar. 2020, p. NA. Gale In Context: Opposing Viewpoints, https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A616453585/OVIC?u=ucinc_main&sid=OVIC&xid=b3c37f8d. Accessed 10 Mar. 2020.

This article is very recent, and discusses the issue of MLB’s attendance problem. It was written by someone in Philadelphia, so it was targeted towards the Phillies attendance. The author states MLB attendance overall has dropped every year for the last 12 seasons, however the Phillies attendance went up last year. This year however as opening day approaches a brand new problem has arisen in the form of coronavirus. As other sports teams have, the Phillies and MLB may start the year out with no fans in attendance. This would only progress the attendance problem the league has.

I have personally thought a lot about this problem. As someone who plans to attend games starting opening day, MLB preventing fans from coming to games would greatly affect my plans and ability to watch games. This source is useful but a bit short compared to others. This post is reliable but is a local story that is a state away, however the topic will affect me too.

This article was very helpful to me. It made me realize I may not get to watch my sport in person for perhaps months. It certainly gets me thinking. But it helps my argument in that despite a deadly virus, MLB has a problem anyways.

“MLB attendance is dropping but revenue is somehow up. How is that possible?” Washingtonpost.com, 19 May 2019. Gale In Context: Opposing Viewpoints, https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A585994094/OVIC?u=ucinc_main&sid=OVIC&xid=e3b031ec. Accessed 10 Mar. 2020.

Over the past decade, MLB has seen fewer and fewer fans. Now that there is a new commissioner, since he took over it’s dropped even further. This offseason baseball has faced a huge cheating scandal and new proposed rule changes that may keep fans from the park. However the revenue taken in continues to grow. This is due to rising ticket prices and concession prices. Places like New York and LA that draw a crowd no matter what, and when they raise prices there they will make a lot of money. The stadiums are far from empty in most cities, so the higher prices are bringing in a lot of money.

This issue really matters to me and makes me really mad. I am someone who regularly attends games every year and I myself have noticed the decline in attendance. But the teams have no reason to care because they are making more money. No desire to put a winning team on the field or to better accomodate fans enjoyment of games. I hate to see teams get rewarded for nothing, all while i pay more.

This article is very good, ans really helps with my argument, in fact it just might be my main argument. This is the issue that gets me fired up and is the reason I care so much. This article has the numerical proof I’m looking for.

“MLB attendance is dropping but revenue is somehow up. How is that possible?” Washingtonpost.com, 19 May 2019. Gale In Context: Opposing Viewpoints, https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A585994094/OVIC?u=ucinc_main&sid=OVIC&xid=e3b031ec. Accessed 10 Mar. 2020.

“Political cartoon: MLB has an attendance problem with or without coronavirus.” Philadelphia Inquirer [Philadelphia, PA], 6 Mar. 2020, p. NA. Gale In Context: Opposing Viewpoints, https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A616453585/OVIC?u=ucinc_main&sid=OVIC&xid=b3c37f8d. Accessed 10 Mar. 2020.

In the aims of argument, pages 91-108 outline writing research based articles. It covers finding your issue, how to do it and what a good issue is. It next explains how to find good sources to backup your issue. The research you must do, online and in books.

My topic is Major League Baseball.

My issue is the decline in attendance and lack of viewing from the younger generation

Key terms: Rob Manfred, MLB attendance records, expansion, blackout, twitter, pace of play, technology, Astros, commercial, Mexico, YouTube salary cap

Key websites: mlb attendance official record

MLB Attendance records: https://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/MLB/2019-misc.shtml

MLB declining attendance: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/29/sports/baseball/mlb-attendance.html

My topic is Major League Baseball.

My issue is the decline in attendance and lack of viewing from the younger generation

Key terms: Rob Manfred, MLB attendance records, expansion, blackout, twitter, pace of play, technology, Astros, commercial, Mexico, YouTube salary cap

Key websites: mlb attendance official record,

Assignment One Essay

             The essay “Waking Up and Taking Charge” is an essay written by Anya Kamenetz regarding the financial issues facing today’s young college students. According to her, there are many unfair ways the financial systems within America’s universities, especially the most prestigious ones. Some of the problems explained in the essay are lack of education funding, fairer credit laws, design of the school-to-work system, justice system, worker protections, living wages, health care, saving programs, support for young families and homeowners and entitlement reform. Among all these though, the issue Kamenetz mainly focused on was student loans, and the cost of college. Kamenetz attended Yale, which is one of the most prestigious and most expensive colleges. After a few examples given, it’s clear that even at a prestigious college like that, students are demanding action to help themselves. Staging sit-in protests, organizing rallies, and petitioning the university. But Kamenetz explains that the real reason why despite these efforts, no big changes have been made yet. The reason is plenty of college students understand the problems facing them and want change but aren’t seeking change in effective ways. The protests and petitions are a nice start, but if students want to start seeing changes, they must start to organize together, and become a louder voice. In her essay Kamenetz gets into politics a bit, and her main solution is for students to form a PAC. Congress has the most control over the education system, and unless students make waves there, nothing will happen. PACs have proved to be an effective way to influence congressmen and women. A large organized group like a PAC has the strong influence on how citizens will vote, and dangle money in front of these same congress members. In the past, fear of having a large organized group call for people to not vote for a candidate, or threaten to withdraw a lot of funding, it has influenced how these elected officials act in office. The downside to this is that PACs are a controversial way to influence Congress. Kamenetz does not address the negative, but from her argument this is her biggest solution.

             My opinion on her argument presented in the essay is that she is completely right. I also believe Kamenetz has done a decent job at presenting her argument, and the essay will certainly sway some. The issue that I have with her argument, regardless that I believe her, is that she provides no rebuttal or counterclaim to her argument. Those with doubts about her argument have no response from her on why those doubts aren’t accurate or unnecessary.  I’m aware of the problems college students face, and especially the complaints from these that are graduating. But with all of these students with these problems and nothing being done about it, it’s going to take something drastic. I like the PAC idea very much, and am not concerned with the counterarguments about how controversial the idea is. I am for change, and without a loud unified voice nothing is going to happen. PACs also require a lot of money to operate, but I am not concerned with this either. The list of people that want to see change is exponentially long, and even if money is an issue, PACs are influential regardless. If all of these small groups and people starting petitions rally around a national movement, it’s going to attract headlines. If a large PAC sends out a list of those not to vote for, people will listen. Helping students with a financial crisis is not a hard cause to get plenty of people to rally around.

A.

The claim made by Kamenetz is that in order to solve the student debt and financial problems, we must begin to take action to influence legislators.

Kamenetz presents this claim as absolute, but there may be more solutions possible

Kamenetz did not provide alternate conditions or scenarios where she would not assert the claim, the argument is structured as the only solution, and that it is the only correct one

B.

There are a few reasons presented by Kamenetz to justify their claim. One is that there is a rapidly growing population of college students facing financial crisis. Compared to past generations it has gotten much worse, so the need for change is now. Another is that the only way to get legislators to listen is to come together and unite in a PAC. PACs can often influence elected officials to vote a certain way.

Kamenetz does not use much evidence in their argument but instead uses emotional appeal and reasoning. She insists you must join a PAC in order to get things changed, but doesn’t offer sound evidence as to why. She instead reasons that if we come together things can change. She also uses emotional appeal to make you feel obligated to help these students, but doesn’t offer why, or even that perhaps the problem begins with the students themselves.

Her argument is well put together, and to me is very believable, but no she does not have any evidence to back her up.

C.

The connection between the claim to the reasoning is that she believes the more people speaking out, directly relates to whether or not change will happen.

I do share these assumptions, however I don’t think this is always related. At a certain size, any group large enough can make a difference, but if it’s a moderate amount it can be hit or miss.

I believe Kamenetz should have offered some rebuttals, if nothing more than to shoot them down. Examples such as are the students responsible or the universities? The students signed up for this.

After reading “Waking Up and Taking Charge” I understand it will be a very controversial argument. However, I have to agree with the argument being made in the article. Something must be done to help the financial crisis facing many college students, and the way to fix it is through legislation. I am not usually a very big fan of PACs, but in this case it may be a scenario of doing the wrong thing for the right reason. The article “College Debt” helped lay out in front of me the issues facing college students, and how urgent those problems need to be addressed. They both convinced me of their argument. I was convinced there was a problem, and then the second one convinced me that her solution would be an effective one, and one that I could morally back, regardless of the criticism.

1. The shared topic of “Waking Up and Taking Charge” and “College Debt” is the issue of college student financial situations.
2. A specific issue discussed in both essays is college student debt.
3. I find Kamenetz a very good spokesperson for different ways to deal with college debt because first, she understands her audience. The way she formats her argument is towards a broad audience, and she uses reasoning to explain her point of view. She doesn’t insist she is right, but provides you with evidence as to why her opinions are right.
4. I believe her proposal is very controversial. Forming a PAC will be criticized by many people, and a lot of people don’t like PACs in politics. They put money behind candidates and attempt to control elections.
5. College students, the families of those students, and those with credit card debt would agree with her proposal.
6. Colleges and universities would not agree with her proposal, as well as credit card companies and rich college students. The elite and those benefiting from the bottom’s financial crisis would like to keep things this way.
7. Her claim is the elite, universities, and the government would like to keep things the way they are. Financially and how students are processed and treated. Her reason is that they make money from students having a financial crisis. Universities get a contract from students to pay tens of thousands, and whether it’s beneficial for the student, they get their money. The rich and elite who can afford to pay their child’s education have nothing to fear. One piece of evidence is only 10 percent of students came from the bottom half of the income scale at selective universities.
8. Kamenetz uses the rhetorical appeals of reason and emotion to argue her side. Most of her argument is reason, facts and explanations as to the process that makes sense to a broad audience. She also adds a bit of emotion to her argument. She uses the emotional appeal to help these young students out of their financial problem.
9. The aim of argument Kamenetz is using is persuading. She is trying to get more people onto her side. She doesn’t just want you to believe her, she wants you to go out and do what she wants. She wants you out there joining a PAC and getting involved.
10. I think she meets three of the four criteria. The one that she doesn’t meet is the self-critical one. She is one-sided in her whole argument, and is not open to criticism to her argument. She does not offer another viewpoint to hers, or that there could be another way.