"Honesty Is Always The Best Policy" by Michael Lemonick
In “Honesty Is Always the Best Policy” Lemonick attempts to demonstrate his honesty in journalism, mostly regarding articles on global warming. Drawing upon ethos, he establishes credibility with his audience by using certain phrases and wording that show he truly is trying to be as honest as possible in his writing. By constantly demonstrating his lack of certainty, he shows his audience that to be an honest journalist, especially when writing about climate change, you can't be completely sure of yourself, considering the instability of the scientific community.
Lemonick says that he joined an organization whose mission was to write stories that “reflected the best available science – no advocacy, no hype.” Yet, he says later, “I've tried to live up to the organization's mission.” The key word here being “tried”. By admitting that he is not perfect, it gives him more credibility as an honest reporter.
At no point in the article does he give either climate change groups – the skeptics and the sensationalists – the upper hand in the argument. Although he criticizes the skeptics, saying, “scientists no longer doubt that global warming is happening,” he still acknowledges the scientific world's uncertainty, explaining that “The science of climate change, like all of science, is complex and messy.”
Lemonick uses ethos throughout his article, convincing the audience of his character. This works better than going for logos or pathos. There's no better way to convince an audience of your honesty than to simply show them.
Having not properly analyzed this particular article, I am not in a terribly strong position to speak of its contents. However, I did like your emphasis on the quote, "I've tried". I agree that this establishes credibility with the audience; its more powerful because most readers are familiar with the author due to his profound and prolific writings, which suggest he has very much succeeded. By not focusing on his own successes, I think he also makes a very subtle emotional appeal to the audience.
ReplyDeleteI also analyzed this article, but you found something that I missed that I think speaks a lot to his honesty. You mentioned that he never gives either group the upper-hand. I think this is incredibly important, especially when trying to form an honest bond with the reader. Due to the fact that he never took sides, he never turned any reader against him, and therefore continues to build honest, trusting relationships with his audience. I believe this is an element of other scientific writers' articles that he would probably find fault with.
ReplyDelete