When composing the storify essay, I started by searching for videos and articles that would be relevant to the question I was asking, “What are the ways technology has changed the way students learn and what are the consequences?” I found quite easily through the storify creation page that searching for related topics through the methods they provide is extremely easy. It honestly was not difficult in the slightest to find good and interesting sources that applied to the context of my argument. The only challenge comes when you are trying to discern an interesting, applicable source from a dull, farfetched source. I felt as though it is rewarding to look at the end result that is the storify publication, the combination of videos, articles, pictures, and text in one neat little easily viewable page is a pleasant sight to see. Knowing that a reader can easily view all of the sources that I found with no more than a single click to each one of them makes it that much easier, I think, to comprehend and for the reader to get involved in what I am trying to say with my storify. The setup of storify allows a reader to think for him or herself on a topic such as the one I investigated, hopefully with the added bonus of being able to see what I have gained from the subject and conversely allow him or her to also gain an opinion on the topic. That is, I think, what makes the storify composition satisfying in the end.

                What made composing this essay different from composing other academic essays in other English classes and across the disciplines was nearly everything about the process. Instead of having to search legitimate sources that had to be accessed through the school website’s research section, I was able to find my sources through storify itself. I didn’t have to go tirelessly searching around through various articles and books and other official documents in the vague hope that a single keyword search would find me what I needed, rather I was able to type in a few pointed key terms into storify and there they appeared to me, all the sources that I could possibly require and that related to my topic in the exact way I desired. Composing the storify entry was also different in that using the opinions of real people were possible, such as using twitter posts made by all kinds of people. I have never encountered an academic essay where such sources were allowed to be used, so being able to use the honest musings of real, everyday people was rather fun. Additionally, in other academic essays, I have had to compose the entire thing with solely words, but here, in this storify essay, I was able to use pictures and videos as sorts of breaks in between various paragraphs in order to make it an easier read and to present the evidence right then and there, whereas with a full text essay, the sources are referenced to and presented in list form at the end only. All in all, it was easy to feel as though composing this essay was much easier and more straightforward than attempting to accumulate a large combination of facts for a black and white paper.

                My argument focused on the ways in which technology affects people today and the way in which students are being affected and, by extension, the way that technology is thus affecting the way in which students learn. Is technology helpful, or is it a detriment? My purpose was to make people aware of the way that modern technology has begun to affect people in the world today, and how it can either help or hurt us depending on how it is used. Technology is not by far the only thing that has uses that can either be a blessing or be harmful depending on the way that people choose to use it, in fact, that detail is true when you get right down to thinking about almost anything. Everything, anything, in the universe can either be used for great good or great evil, depending on how the user chooses to wield it. With such an argument, I intended for my audience to be anyone and everyone who has used technology in their lives. Supposing the audience is more suited to be people who understand what it means to be ‘dependent’ on technology, but still, the topic itself can really apply to a broader range of people than that. Anyone who has used technology understands that such devices have great potential, the power lies in how such things are used by the people who have them.

                I chose to start off my storify with a picture. Although it appears simple upon first glance, I actually felt as though it held a strong significance and importance to it. To the average technology user, one glance at the image might give them thoughts that there is nothing out of the ordinary in the picture, just as it was for me. Except, upon further inspection, one begins to realize that this picture, detailing a room filled with empty tables, chairs, and a dozen computers is filled with only one thing, technology. Clearly, the scene provides some evidence of just how important technology has become to us. The image is depicting a learning space, but there are no pencils, no pens, no paper, nothing aside from another computer every few inches or so. With this image, I hoped to convey the meaning of the importance of technology to us in modern day life. Clearly, we know how to use it for the good of learning.

                My next move was to introduce two different articles that both spoke on the role that technology is capable of playing in increasing student performance. Good, solid articles are needed when it comes to establishing an argument that you want people to believe in, and I felt as though these two both served their purpose. As the first article explains, technology can change the way that students learn and the way in which they are taught. Technological devices are an important part of learning that we cannot just toss to the side simply because they have the potential to cause distractions, because just look at all the good that it can do. Students no longer have to stick strictly to textbooks; the internet contains much of the knowledge required for learning. I mean, without the internet, without technology at my disposal, how would I have created the very storify essay that I am writing this reflection on? The sources certainly would not have been so easy to locate and I may have spent hours, days, attempting to locate valid sources to use in my essay. Since I am a student with accessibility to the internet, I have what I need in order to learn about topics such as the way technology helps students learn and as such I am able to detail my input on the matter.

It was an integral part of my argument for me to include the comments of real people as they talk about how technology seems to be affecting them and the lives around them. Hurricane Sandy was a recent threat that many people were concerned about, but I know a lot of people who were more upset by the idea that their power might go out rather than being concerned about lasting damage that the storm might cause. Their concern was placed in the terrifying thought that under the circumstances of losing electricity, they would be without their computers for possibly hours. Technology dependence is a real issue that we have to face, but not one that cannot be helped.

                I mentioned the bit about how much time the average American between eight and eighteen spends using a phone, computer, television, or other electronic device for seven and a half hours per day because it is important to point out how strongly technology affects everyone. For many people, it is probably indeed true that much of that time is not spent learning and is rather being wasted as a distraction via technology. However, such is the case simply because that is how these people are choosing to spend their time. Spending time doing little to nothing on the internet is just another method of passing by free time on a given day, just as how other people use that same time to party and do other things. Being on the internet, using technology like this, is another form of recreation. Wasting endless hours browsing the internet when time is better spent on homework or other work, however, is when situations become a little trickier. Once it gets to that point, that is when using your time wisely comes into play. Study habits need to be reinforced at such times, a person needs to have the will to actually do his or her work and not procrastinate. Having the internet does not change the fact that a person is going to procrastinate from what he or she doesn’t want to do, the only issue here is that the internet makes it so easy to procrastinate. Students need to train themselves in how to use technology to learn when it is required, and not to allow themselves to get distracted when their focus is needed. The video that I posted also touches upon these ideas.

                I thought it important to mention the potential for learning that technology brings forth that we cannot get anywhere else. Inventions in the field of learning create limitless possibilities to make it easier and easier, developing methods of teaching and learning that many of us would probably have never thought possible. Adaptive technologies that adapt to the person doing the learning, learning apps meant specifically for deaf students in order to improve their learning experience. None of this would be possible without technology. These are then examples of the possible greatness that comes with using technology properly.


“What are the ways technology has changed the way students learn and what are the consequences?”


To put it plainly, Mitt Romney’s speech had only one angle: to present himself as the best choice for next president and to convince American voters to vote for him in the election. He began by identifying himself with his audience, working his way into the forefront of their thoughts by providing anecdotes from his past. About halfway through, he supplemented his claims by explaining in depth the types of past experiences he had and why such lessons in life would help him to be a better president than Obama. This then turned into him claiming that Obama had no such experiences to draw from. Afterward, Mitt Romney began to present certain facts and statistics that supposedly supported his claim of Obama being the wrong man for the job, and at that same moment presented a five-step ‘idea’ that he has that is to ‘fix’ America provided Mitt Romney is elected. He ended with a promise, a promise that if he is elected, all of our pains will go away.

In the beginning, Mitt Romney attempted to appeal to his audience’s sense of humor through the use of jokes. What I am referencing to is from this quote here, “I love the way he [Paul Ryan] lights up around his kids and how he’s not embarrassed to show the world how much he loves his mom. But Paul, I still like the playlist on my iPod better than yours”. Since humor is a method of getting a group of people’s mood to lighten up and for them to relax, this was intended to soften up his audience so that they would be more open to hearing him out through the rest of his speech. However, I felt that this joke of his was a failed attempt because it had no backbone, no relation to any of the matters at hand, not even in the slightest.

Next he tries to prove to the audience that he is a person the same as them by identifying with them like so, “Four years ago, I know that many Americans felt a fresh excitement about the possibilities of a new president. That president was not the choice of our party but Americans always come together after elections. We are a good and generous people who are united by so much more than what divides us”. I noticed that he used the words ‘we’ and ‘us’ in order to bring himself into the same whole that the audience would naturally find themselves in, thus showing that he is far from a separate source but is rather one among them. In doing so, he has successfully identified himself with his audience as far as I can tell.

I saw him appealing to human pride frequently throughout his speech. One such example would be here, when he says, “Americans were eager to go back to work, to live our lives the way Americans always have – optimistic and positive and confident in the future. That very optimism is uniquely American”. Do I believe him? No. Yet I do believe that for Americans who show unwavering pride in the country they live in, that this would appeal strongly to their attitudes.

Mitt Romney reminds his audience, “This was the hope and change America voted for”, so why hasn’t anything happened for the better? If anything, he claims, in his four years in office Obama has only made this worse, not better. Mitt Romney preys on the ideals that Americans had when they first voted Obama into office, makes them realize that none of Obama’s promises have yet come into fruition, and then makes the claim that Americans deserve better because we have earned it. Apparently only one man can make this come true for all of us, and Mitt Romney is presenting that one person as his own self. Perhaps this is a success on his part, because he addresses his audience well when he appeals to the hard work that a good many likely had to endure. He says, “You deserved it because during these years, you worked harder than before. You deserved it because when it cost more to fill up your car, you cut out movie nights and put in long hours. Or when you lost that job that paid $22.50 an hour with benefits, you took two jobs at 9 bucks an hour and fewer benefits. You did it because your family depended on you. You did it because you’re an American and you don’t quit. You did it because it was what you had to do”. People like to be recognized for their efforts, it’s just a part of human nature, so I’d say he hit it home on this one.

The next strategy that Mitt Romney used was delving into his past and making it known to his audience in order to help them to further realize that above all, he is human and an American like them. He brought up the historical moment of Neil Armstrong setting foot on the moon, I think in order to show that he was from a time when Americans dared to take incredible risks that, in the end, led to amazing outcomes. He furthers this point when he says, “I don’t doubt for a second that Neil Armstrong’s spirit is still with us: that unique blend of optimism, humility and the utter confidence that when the world needs someone to do really big stuff, you need an American. That’s how I was brought up”. This was a blatant attempt to say that he was raised with the exact right ideals for the job he is aiming for; he doesn’t try to hide his intentions very much at this point. What I gleaned from this quote is that Mitt Romney is trying to associate the concept of the perfect American with himself until the line is blurred so much that he really appears to be the type of person he is describing – optimistic, modest, and capable of doing really big ‘stuff’. Wait; doesn’t that make him the opposite of modest?

In reflecting on his past, I also felt that I saw a lot of ‘hey, look, just like you I wasn’t born into much but look what I’ve accomplished today’ sort of statements coming from Mitt Romney. He might be trying too hard to get his audience to identify with him. However, I noticed a little something that I think may have served to isolate some of his audience members, rather than making them feel more comfortable which was him saying, “My friends cared more about what sports team we followed than what church we went to”. Now sure, later on he mentions praying which is all well and good, but here I felt as though he might be isolating some of the members of his audience who care more about religion than they do about sports.

Continuing on with his personal life, Mitt Romney goes on to say, “Unconditional love is a gift that Ann and I have tried to pass on to our sons and now to our grandchildren. All the laws and legislation in the world will never heal this world like the loving hearts and arms of mothers and fathers”. Obviously, he is appealing to the hearts of all the parents in his audience while letting it be known that he too, like them, is a parent. He is a father, so his argument turns into, ‘don’t you want a loving father to be the new father of America?’.

I saw Mitt Romney trying very strongly to appeal to the women in his audience. He talked about how being a mother was a more important responsibility than anything he would ever do, in addition to mentioning little quotes from his mother about how women should be regarded as equals with men. He says that he remembers his mother saying, “Why should women have any less say than men, about the great decisions facing our nation?”. Adding onto that quote, he continues with, “As Governor of Massachusetts, I chose a woman Lt. Governor, a woman chief of staff, half of my cabinet and senior officials were women, and in business, I mentored and supported great women leaders who went on to run great companies”. Appealing to women a little strongly there? I think so too.

Now comes another recollection of past experiences that Mitt Romney talks about having gone through. He started by saying that Obama, “had almost no experience working in business. Jobs to him are about government. I learned the real lessons about how America works from experience”. The good job here on Mitt Romney’s part is that he actually backs up that statement with business experience from his past that he claims is the type of experience that is relevant toward being the president.

Mitt Romney acknowledges the middle class and their struggles, which I thought seemed to be an important choice of his. He says, “In the richest country in the history of the world, this Obama economy has crushed the middle class. Family income has fallen by $4000, but health insurance premiums are higher, food prices are higher, utility bills are higher, and gasoline prices have doubled. Today more Americans wake up in poverty than ever before”. He isn’t using exact figures for most of his claims in the previous quote, but it still gives the audience something important to think about. However, I feel that his comment is also vague to the point that the audience cannot put too much merit into it.

Mitt Romney mentions a five-step plan that he has that, once he is voted into office, he plans to enact. He also claims that it will create 12 million new jobs, a proposition that I’m sure made many of his audience members thrilled. His plan, in short, is for America to be energy independent by 2020, to give Americans skills needed for jobs and careers, to forge new trade agreements, to put America back onto a balanced budget, and to champion and reduce taxes on small businesses. Well, that is indeed a lot of promises he is making in this five-step plan of his. Except, how exactly does he plan on doing all of these things? Mitt Romney is stating what he supposedly plans to do, but he left out the most important part which is how he would go about doing it! Leaving out the biggest portion of his argument as he did, it makes it very difficult to believe that he will come through for us with this five step idea.

The article I read for the Rhetorical Analysis paper is Mitt Romney’s Republican Convention Speech:


Scrubbing Bubbles one step toilet bowl cleaner? They claim “effortless toilet cleaning with just the tap of a foot”. Sure, if you want to keep your dirty toilet dirty then by all means, just tap your foot to Scrubbing Bubbles. However, our Seventh Generation toilet bowl cleaner is nearly that easy and ten times more effective. (either/or)


Look at that glass table right there, clearly someone knows what’s good, it’s obvious Free & Clear, glass & surface cleaner has been used. (non sequitur)


Imagine taking a shower in a filthy bathroom with dirt encrusted tiles and soap scum in the tub. If that vision made you cringe, then you need to buy our Seventh Generation  tub & tile cleaner! (red herring)


If you don’t clean your house daily with our Seventh Generation all purpose cleaner, the be prepared to get an earful from your family about how unclean your house is. (slippery slope)


First Lady Michelle Obama uses Seventh Generation shower cleaner and she has proven to be continually happy with the results. Isn’t that enough to tell you that our solution is the best solution?! (ad verecundium)

In Lunsford’s paper, he defines rhetorical analysis as, “a close reading of a text to find how and whether it works to persuade” (Lunsford 97). The idea is to read a text that is meant to be persuasive. Rhetorical analysis comes into play once you begin analyzing the text for specific strategies, tricks, and other writing tools that are meant to persuade its audience onto the writer’s side. An argument is made all the better depending on how well the writer can work the pieces of his argument into one, fluid, convincing proposal. As Lunsford says, “Ask yourself what strategies the piece employs to move your heart, win your trust, and change your mind—and why it does or doesn’t do so” (Lunsford 97).


Source: Lunsford’s “Rhetorical Analysis”

When I first looked at the hulu commercial, I saw that it was mainly a pathos styled argument. The context of the commercial was clearly based on humor more than it was on anything else. It didn’t try to strike the emotions of the audience in a heartfelt way, nor did it try to present real facts or anecdotes about what hulu is, the entire commercial is, rather, trying to appeal to the audience in a joking way. They achieved this form of attracting the audience by making references to aliens, of course without failing to acknowledge popular science fiction elements that many people know well such as the threat of brain eating.

When it came to having to recreate the original argument using a different appeal, my mind soon shot toward the idea of transforming this hulu commercial from a humorous wave of confusion into a straightforward, clear advertisement. I mean, I enjoy the alien threat of brain eating form of humor that the commercials use, but I don’t believe that the exact message of the commercial is made entirely clear to many of those who watch it without paying special attention.

The hulu commercials don’t make a very good effort to outright say what they are advertising, rather the subject ends up being danced around and joked about and the commercials merely end with the threat of the earth on the near horizon. What I’m saying is that a certain amount of effort is definitely required in order for the audience to see that what is being advertised is a website called hulu where videos can be streamed in ways that exceed youtube.

In light of the points I have made on the original commercial, I decided to recreate the commercial in a way that it could be presented in a more serious tone. The argument of the commercial thus changed from one based on humoring the audience into a different sort based on fact. While I knew that it would in no way be as entertaining as aliens walking around the earth disguised as humans and trying to destroy the human race from the inside out, I knew that my method would be more direct with getting the point across. With the change of appeal, hulu’s intended message comes across with a whole new level of clarity.

With its transformation into an entirely different style of commercial, the way that the audience is to be persuaded changes as well. After my alterations, the commercial then sought to persuade through the knowledge of a general interest in watching shows online. With the use of the internet, even if a person has missed his or her favorite show on television on a given day, there are ways online to catch up on that sort of thing. This is what hulu does for people who end up in that predicament frequently, I know I’m one who almost never sees shows right when they air.

By mentioning in my version of the commercial the potential of the site to allow viewers to use hulu for amazing video streaming, the commercial is thus persuading the audience into trying the site out in order to see if it really gives what it offers. This functions differently from the original in that, in the original, I see the audience more leaning toward searching hulu online simply because they are trying to find out what the heck the alien commercial was advertising and not because of any understanding of what the site actually happens to be.

It is my belief that the second evolution of the commercial serves as one that is more persuasive than the original commercial. I say ‘more persuasive’ if only because the point is made clear in black and white, whereas with the original commercial the point was not obvious. I think this remains true even when the original intended audience is brought into question. Sure, it isn’t as funny, but the message is the same and I believe the original intended audience would agree that the second commercial is just as convincing as the first, if not more so.

The other benefit of the straightforward version of the commercial is the potential audience that it gains by being clear and right to the point for less science fiction interested viewers and viewers who do not react to sarcastic humor. The straight to the point argument draws in audience members who prefer simplistic, obvious arguments that they don’t have to pay a whole lot of attention to in order to understand properly. The advertisement basically just goes, ‘this is what hulu is, try us out, thanks’. In turn, with the original commercial, the advertisement is a lot more as follows, ‘we are aliens, we are doing stuff on earth, this is weird but we have a site called hulu’, establishing a state of confusion within the members of the audience. As a result, I see one of the appeals of the second commercial to be drawing in a new group of audience who would otherwise have not been able to decipher the meaning of the first version.

Finally, I felt that the recreated version of the commercial would succeed in targeting an audience who is not as computer savvy as the originally intended. Hulu is such an easy to use website that merely by hearing of the site’s potential to stream episodes of various television shows, one should be able to navigate his or her way there and be able to figure out how to use it. You have only to watch the commercial, moving on from there the many features of hulu quickly become available, so simple and easy to use it’s almost a bad thing not to at least check it out.

Animoto’d Hulu Commercial


The commercial I chose to work with is a Hulu commercial, located here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xQ9ePPUApmY

Watching some hulu commercials, I came to the conclusion that the way they present themselves is through the use of pathos. Hulu is appealing to the audience in a humorous way, usually springing random jokes about aliens eating the brains of the population due to too much television. The joking aspect of the context is used in order to get viewers to watch even more episodes of various television shows through the use of hulu’s video streaming site. They are encouraging their audience to watch more and more, causing the brains of the viewers to be tastier for the aliens when they inevitably show up of course.

Since the original videos themselves were so full of such humor as brain eating, my initial idea was to present the commercial in a more serious tone. Instead of using pathos, I used logos when I went about editing the format of the commercial. Some viewers might not, from the original commercial, even understand what exactly hulu is about after having watched it. The difference is that, with the change of appeal, I think the message that hulu is trying to get across has become more clear. Do you want to watch your favorite shows and other shows you might be interested in online? Then check out hulu!

Pathos, as Lunsford put it, are “arguments based on emotion”. When a writer or speaker is using pathos, an appeal is trying to be made toward the emotions of an audience in order to influence them over to the side of the speaker. Such things as “words, images, and sounds can arouse emotions”, which gives a lot of potential tools for the speaker to work with. The thing about pathos is that when you argue a point based on emotion over anything else, persuasion is the way to go and not actually arguing. A person gets farther with their audience when he is seeking to persuade rather than throw his arguments at them. The difference between persuasion and argument? Well, with persuasion, the writer wants his audience “to take action”. Whereas, with argument, the speaker is trying to “convince that something is true”. Pathos has to do with wrapping your audience’s minds around what you are wanting to persuade, usually aided through personal chatter such as indulging them by letting them know you are speaking from personal experience. Additionally, humor such as what is oh so frequently used in plenty of speeches today, is an aspect of pathos and the emotional argument. Jokes help to lighten a mood, relax an audience, if all goes well even putting the audience into a more malleable state.


Ethos, as Lunsford put it, are “arguments based on character”. The fact that these types of arguments are based on character lets you know that what they are appealing to are values and that such things cannot possibly stimulate every varying type of audience. Here in ethos, we have the importance of reputation bringing more credibility to an argument and by extension to its persuasive power. “Authority, trust, and motives” count when it comes to listening to an argument based on ethos. A reader has to keep in mind what the reasonings are suspected to be behind the writer’s arguments, what motived the writer to say the things he’s saying, how much he can be trusted, and whether or not he even has the authority to say what he is claiming. Ethos encompasses the writer’s honesty and respect for his audience. If they aren’t being respected, then what should keep an audience listening to a speaker such as that? Better yet, why would they ever want to agree with a speaker who disrespects them as a group? They wouldn’t! Here, details, appearance, and presentation matter on a large scale. These types of arguments require the message to be clearly conveyed, sources cited, and details, details, details.


Logos, as Lunsford put it, are “arguments based on fact and reason”. He drew an interesting little parallel to the fact that Spock, and his race the Vulcans, approach all of their arguments in this way. Logos also seeks to persuade, but such methods require solid evidence of both hard and factual nature. Evidence gives credence to a claim; it makes the case plausible and capable of being listened to. A writer or a speaker here is trying to get his readers or listeners to believe him, which is why facts are necessary. Statistics, polls, and surveys are also a common part of logos as they can be used as a form of evidence in order to point out specific facts or majority views or what have you, such as when a decision is helped to be made based on a majority vote. Speakers here would probably want to use such techniques as telling anecdotes of the variety that can back up their arguments, providing evidence of the speaker’s own human experience relating to the topic and thus supporting their arguments. Analogies are also a useful part of this, as certain analogies can bring clarity to an audience of otherwise difficult to understand portions of a topic. Like Spock, with logos people seek to fuel the fires of their arguments with logic, reasoning, and common sense. 

Incident Report #1201817

Report Entered: 09/20/2012 13:42:12

            Witnesses: Professor Plum, Miss Scarlet, and myself (Mr. Green)

            Offenders: Unknown




On Thursday September 20, 2012, Colonel Mustard of 3 Crocodile Street, New York City was found dead in an old mansion in Connecticut after having spent most of the night surrounded by friends. At the time the incident occurred, I was off duty, my free time being consumed by a planned get together with Professor Plum, Miss Scarlet, and Colonel Mustard himself. The night’s festivities included cocktails and various appetizers and snacks, the alcohol of which could have potentially been the reasoning behind the events that transpired.

We four gathered together in the mansion at approximately 6:00 pm. I arrived on scene a little behind schedule at about 6:20 pm, when I knocked on the heavy double doors the other three were all already inside. For near on four hours, until 10:30 pm give or take a few minutes, our group of friends did little else other than consuming the aforementioned cocktails and food while we informed one another of our individual activities of recent times. Everyone in the room appeared to be having a good time.

It was roughly 11:00 pm when discussions became a bit more uncomfortable to bear. A heated argument began between Colonel Mustard and Professor Plum about the importance of preserving crocodile and alligator wildlife. Colonel Mustard fervently disagreed with the professor’s views of putting a stop to crocodile hunting. I was completely uninterested in the conversation and, as I learned from my interview with Miss Scarlet later that night, she too had no thoughts invested in the subject.

At midnight on the hour, the lights went out as if on some sort of cue. The entire room was pitch black, so dark that I could not even see my own hand in front of my face. I expected the lights to come back on momentarily, but instead I suddenly heard a gunshot that I never would have expected. Following the gunshot there was a loud thump and I knew that the sound I’d heard had indicated that a body had fallen to the floor, but I did not know who it had been. The lights came back on a minute later, my eyes darted to the figure on the floor that was, to my horror, my best friend lying in a pool of his own blood. As I was unable to interview myself, I quickly called the incident in and the immediately proceeded to interview the other two witnesses left in the room.

Miss Scarlet claimed through stutters and crying that Colonel Mustard’s death had “completely caught her off guard” and that “he shouldn’t have had to die so young”. I was unable to get much else out of her as we were both very broken up about the loss of our dear friend, but I did later hear her murmur that “he never should have hidden the truth from him”. Who is this ‘him’ and what truth was Colonel Mustard hiding? It was at that moment that I began to suspect Professor Plum was far more likely to be behind this than Miss Scarlet. When I interviewed Professor Plum, however, he seemed genuinely confused as to what had just happened. A person can’t fake that level of ignorance; it was as if he had not even been present when the incident occurred though I know for a fact that he was sitting in the chair right to the left of my own.

What truly happened to Colonel Mustard is still unknown, investigations are in progress. But if it was really Professor Plum who did it, then where did he acquire a gun? Upon the conclusion of this report, I fully intend to check my things and make sure that my hidden work revolver is still where I left it… I’ve seen the man take things that were not his before, but to commit theft and then murder a close friend, I wouldn’t think that he had it in him.


The writer is Mr. Green, a close friend to Colonel Mustard and the two witnesses.

The audience is Green’s fellow police officers who are just hearing about the incident that occurred.

The context is the suspected murder of Colonel Mustard and the evidence and all known information that could potentially shed some light on what really happened at the scene of the shooting.

The purpose is to try to figure out who killed Colonel Mustard and to inform the police officers what is at present known about the murder.


In order to produce the police report, I had to do some research into the genre mainly so that I could see how to go about setting up the structure of a real police report. Once I knew the way it was supposed to be formatted, I described the situation how I would imagine a police officer would, which is assumed to be formal, proper, detailed, and straightforward. A police officer filing a report isn’t going to dance around the subject, try to make the murder sound interesting, or try to tell the story in a mystery story style manner. No, a police officer would give the facts clearly and one after another, keeping it simple and straight to the point. So that was how my knowledge of the genre contributed to my production of the police report.


Mr. Green is bringing forth an argument that claims a few things. The first of which is him trying to say, in not so many words, that he did not commit the murder. Obviously he doesn’t want to sound defensive so he is unable to outright say it, and he cannot claim that he knows it had to have either been Plum or Scarlet because he knows for himself that he did not do it, and that makes things complicated for him. The point of his argument, on a whole, is to inform. He is trying to inform his audience (the police officers) of all the facts that he knows for sure so that they are able to decide for themselves what really happened in the mansion before and during the murder.