To build his argument he mentions the positive side of Fox stand. However, Bauder does not forget to mention the need of airing news that is unpleasant to the ears of its audience. He leaves the reader wondering about his stand on the debate when he takes on the opponent’s side. Towards the end of the article, Bauder takes the proposing stand to argue out his point in the article.
Bauder gives support to his argument in several ways. Throughout the article, Bauder uses questions to drive his argument. Further, the use of quotation helps the reader to identify the stand of Bauder in the article. Rhetoric statements characterize the argument pointing out the cause of disagreement in the article. He compares the airtime given to Iraqi war by other channel using statistics. He sites 20% by CNN, 18% by MSNBC and 6% daytime news hole. It is probable that figures are assertive than mere use of words. He manages to use contradictory statements to exemplify his forth and back framing of his argument. This might challenge a reader who does not follow the argument.
Bauder’s uses illustrative statement throughout the article to attest his argument. For example, ‘’certain folks don’t want bad news” helps to illustrate his point. This is a strategy since it sparks emotion of the reader, thus influencing readers stand on the point of argument. Another strategy that he employs in his article is the frequent use of questions to influence the stand of the reader. “So how to explain the divergent priorities?” The use of questions probably points the need to have a divergent view over the news to put in air. He effectively illustrates a situation of divergent views in the society. Moreover, he argued it is less rewarding to dwell on negative things.
The central idea in his argument is the audience of they intend to serve. He points out that their intention is to give priority to the likes of their viewers. He believes