Pump Faking

There are those overachievers like Jonah Lehrer who fear they’ve been promoted beyond their levels of competence. So they cheat to stay there and typically cave under the pressure of performing consistently on the big stage. Jonah Lehrer's most incriminating quote was, “I'm vaguely aware that people wrote books before Google existed, but I have no idea how.” In those words he essentially admitted his ignorance of journalism. In my opinion,  for one thing self-plagiarism is not the same as plagiarism, Lehrer is unlikely to demand that The New Yorker retract his own stories. Still, it’s not a victimless crime. Lehrer’s readers deserve to know whether the stuff he’s representing as new material was previously published. Regardless, his New Yorker editors surely won’t appreciate that he’s been passing off old copy as brand new. 

Lehrer, clearly found it all too easy to Google himself and the material he found what most of us do. He recycled it, again and again in different publications. When his own words seemed inadequate to make a point in his blogs, he borrowed the ideas of other writers as if they were his own. And when if that wasn’t sufficient enough for him he would simply just make up words. Some people, such as myself may ask what’s the big deal in the wake of this controversy. Also, why was it wrong for Lehrer to recycle his own work from one publication to another via Google? After analysing from a scholarly perspective I have accepted two reasons of the misused information's impact. 

First, readers expect the words they are reading are written specifically for them unless they are informed otherwise. To give them words written for another publication cheats them. This compares to the same way that a college student is considered a cheat who submits the same paper to satisfy the requirements of different classes. The second reason this is wrong is legalistic, but important copyright laws. Virtually every issue of every newspaper and magazine published is copyrighted by the publisher, typically a corporation. The articles belong to the publisher, not the writer. For a writer to recycle those words in another publication amounts to plagiarism and the misuse of discourse. It can be concluded that Lehrer isn’t a journalist. Yes, the publications where his work appeared employed journalists. And what he wrote most of the time looked like journalism. Regardless, he didn’t learn the most fundamental lessons of journalism And despite his years of elite education.

Between the lines

These articles illustrate how the stases are present in both scientific articles and literary criticism. They also shed light on how an author might address the stases and how this creates and responds to various types of audiences. This article examined the usefulness of identifying the stasis of an argument, and whether it concerns an issue of fact, definition, cause, value, or action. The stasis of an argument still has to be proven or justified. The author must assume the value of addressing a specific audience on a topic in a particular stasis. After the position has been established it is essential to analyze the rhetoric of the disciplines. Arguments in public forums tend to naturally exploit the full stases. Exemplary arguments in representative issues are then analyzed for their stasis and how they justify arguing over the issues they address. On the other hand science articles open questions of fact, classification, and cause. Articles in literary criticism are problematic, they usually concern issues of value that are already granted by their audience. Jeanne Fahnestock and Marie Secor contend that the classical notion of the stases is still relevant to rhetorical argument today. They define the stases and their function in rhetorical analysis and asserting that they are evident in scientific articles and literary criticism. Overall, the authors argue that an analysis of the stases has an important role in the rhetorical analysis of an argument, context, and audience. Essentially, the stasis of an argument is the central question it addresses. Questions of fact, definition, and causes represent the lower stases, while questions of value and action represent the higher stases. Identifying which of the stases an author chooses to address helps one identify the general outline of their argument (429). Killingsworth and Palmer confirmed that media relevance and news interest is based on the audience's knowlede of the subject. It is evident by reading these articles that an author reaches a certain kind of audience depending on which of the stases they choose to explore. If an author stays in the lower stases of fact, definition, and causes, they are likely just trying to present the basics of a topic to an audience that has little prior knowledge of the subject. Regardless, if an author chooses the higher stases of value and action without addressing the lower stases, they will likely assume that their audience already has this basic knowledge. So in-turn they are trying to either push them to some sort of action or the make an evaluative judgment.

Wolf Tale

The story of "Living In A Landscape Of Fear" by Cristina Eisenberg is an article that consisted of a unique blend of intertextuality which ultimately influences the rhetorical situation. The author's introduction is intense and very descriptive of the events taking place. Setting up the initial scene with the suspense of a chase scene was essential to the readability of the story. Then the language and tone of the article shifts towards intertextuality in the sense that Eisenberg goes on a eloquent rant about the actual landscape by comparing it to paradise. Bazerman talks about intertextuality, and asserts that it's the way texts refer to other texts, but also the way they are dependent on a sea of ideas that have come out of other texts, past and present. This was apparent throughout the story during the references of the landscape and its relation to the territory of the wolves. These revelations provided perspective and a visual of the relevance and dominance of wolf presence. The flow of the story in it's entirety exemplified using text as an authority on which to base your argument and also using background, support and contrast. A rhetorical situation arises whenever a  writer sees a need to communicate with an audience in order to accomplish a goal. Eisenberg facilitated and tailored the communication for her audience by employing jumps between scenes. The rhetorical situation was established as the set of related factors whose interaction creates and influences a discourse. The rhetorical situation is the environment in which the discourse will exist and operate. In this case the detailed affection with the landscape of northwestern Montana was crucial. Constraints are all the other factors that surround the delivery of a discourse and can influence the way it is received by the audience. The tone was consistently sensitive considering the circumstances so the audience response was mutual. Constraints can also be positive assets working in the writer’s favor. Ironically these constraints are often considered negative liabilities working against the writer's case. In institutional situations a writer may even be sometimes considered as secondary audience members. An example of this conclusive accusation is as when a writer drafts their original document that is obviously intended for a primary audience. Regardless before being published, the article must first satisfy a boss who will be officially credited and responsible for the documented works. As a consequence of this interesting dynamic and transition, the writer and boss both are also a secondary audience with obligations to critique the draft. So of course exigence is the driving force in a rhetorical situation that makes the writer and editor initiate rhetorical practice as a means to communicate. It often appears in a piece as a problem that needs to be solved or some condition that needs to be changed or prevented from changing. This was discussed by mentioning the influx of wolves by an increased presence. Also the significant recollection of noticeable change in number and the behavior of the deer. The most interesting development of the story was the perception of interest in the hunt as apposed to fear.