1

RHETORICAL ANALYSIS

Rhetorical Analysis
Adriana Castorena
University of Texas at El Paso
RWS 1301

RHETORICAL ANALYSIS

Since hunger has always been a big problem in the United States, scientists have
discovered something called GMOs or genetically modified organisms which is a concept
that was introduced in the mid twentieth century and made available in late nineteen
nineties. For those of you that are not sure what GMOs are, they are plants or animals that
are injected with certain DNA genes that make them resistant to disease or in the
agricultural business, help make crops bigger but not always healthier. Even though GMOs
are viewed as a scientific breakthrough, many argue that they are not worth the danger
that comes with this process.
In order to get more in depth information on the impact of genetically modified
organisms, I decided to analyze an artifact related to the topic. The text I chose is a
scholarly chapter called Genetically Modified Plants- the Debate Continues by Rosie S.
Hails from the book Trends in Ecology & Evolution. I will give a detailed analysis by focusing
on six concepts; text, audience, author, ethos, logos, pathos, constraints and exigence. All of
these components are part of the rhetorical situation that is always portrayed in any type
of paper or article. My purpose from this is to acquire further knowledge of how rhetors
use various techniques to get their point across to the reader.
One thing I noticed right away about this text is that it includes an abstract and
keywords in the beginning of the article. This is helpful for someone like me who is not
fully aware of what GMOs are and the lexis that comes along with it. By simply reading the

RHETORICAL ANALYSIS

abstract one can get an idea if the article is interesting to them and determine whether or
not they want to keep reading. The text gives specific details in chart form of several plants
that are tested with the different herbicides and pesticides. This data is helpful for those
wanting to know more about GMO experimentation.
The audience is anyone who knows what GMOs are and wants to learn about the
risks and benefits that come with this new trend. This is clear because Hails never gives a
definition of what GMOs are so she assumes that anyone reading her piece will have prior
knowledge as she talks about DNA technology evolution but not precisely about the
modified plants origin.
In this article we learn a little bit more about who the author is by clicking on her
name and being shown an email address as well as the Institution affiliation that she is a
part of which is the NERC Institute of Environmental Microbiology in Oxford, UK. This
information gives the reader background information about the person who wrote the
work that they are writing. This ties in to ethos as it makes the speaker credible, a question
we should all ask when reading an informative piece like this on is does the author know
what he is talking about?. We should always ask ourselves this question because we want
to make sure that the person that is providing us with all this information is an expert and
can be trusted. In this case I asked myself How much should I trust Rosie Hails? Is she a
reliable source? my answer was yes given her background.

RHETORICAL ANALYSIS

Along with being a reliable source, a writer should always keep the audience in
mind and the emotions that their data will provoke. A key factor when writing a piece is
logos or the order of which the content is given the reader. The information must appeal to
the audience so that they want to read it. Hails does this by organizing his or her facts in an
accurate manner that people will want to keep reading. In this article the author separates
the facts by three different boxes or in this case experiments of plant resistance and the
pros and cons they offer. After this the author starts by defining ecological risk so that the
reader is aware of what is considered harmful to the ecosystem.
A typical strategy that authors use is pathos, or the emotion that he or she is trying
to get the reader to feel. Throughout the article, Hails seems pretty neutral as she does not
take a side of the topic which makes the reader have to decide whether GMOs are good or
bad. Unlike most authors who try to persuade readers into a certain mindset, Hails does a
very good job at letting the audience figure that out for themselves.
One thing I have learned from rhetorical analysis is that often times what the
audience understands from the text is not what the author meant. This is all part of
perspective and this is how constraints and exigence take place. Constraints are factors in a
situation that make the audience more or less sympathetic to a discourse in this case the
article. These constraints are portrayed throughout the article because Hails mentions
several positive and negative effects of these genetically modified plants. Like I said before,

RHETORICAL ANALYSIS

this makes the audience think, yes GMOs might help plants, they can also destroy them.
This mentally is exactly what caused Hails to write this piece. This spark is also referred
to as exigence which is the motive that makes audience of rhetor to respond.
After reading this piece I am still torn in the middle whether or not I should be for or
against GMOs but my take home point is that whatever I read, regardless of the subject,
these six notions will always be involved. Although I have not made up my mind on this hot
topic, I gained much insight not only on the significance of GMOs and its effects but also in
how I examine material rhetorically.

RHETORICAL ANALYSIS

References
Hails, R. (2000) Genetically Modified Plants- the debate continues. Trends in Ecology &
Evolution. Vol 15, Issue 1. 14-18.