The author of the review claims A Dog’s Purpose moves too fast for its plot and results in a weird movie. A Dog’s Purpose is what the author uses to support his writing. Informing people on the movie is the reviews overall purpose. It also tells audiences the movie is not the greatest. This allows people who are considering to watch the movie to see it or not. The review gives a personal opinion and a one-point-five out of four stars rating. This is not a superlative rating, which could have an effect on the box office outcome. The audience of this review is those who are film buffs and people who are considering seeing A Dog’s Purpose. The ethos of the author is excellent. We can tell this because they have seen the movie and reviews on rogerebert.com. …show more content…
Within their article they discuss three different articles and their outcome. The first article they discuss doesn’t help my research, however, the other two do. The first source they use to provide evidence is about how mobile advertising can help ticket sales. This part of the editorials purpose was to examine the process of location-based advertising (LBA) on mobile phones. They found out these LBAs were more effective on people than pop-up ads on computers. Then, they discuss the effects the word of mouth has on ticket sales. Their data supports word of mouth effects the positivity or negativity on the sale of movie tickets. The authors are writing to people who do research and want to know more about movie sales. The ethos of the authors is great. Because this is an editorial, it is a reflection on the sources; therefore, they only have three sources. I tried to look up the articles which helped me. I found one and the sources were very credible and used lots of sources for their results. Compared to my other annotations this sources provides more data on advertising before a movie is released. This is comparable to my project on because I asked questions in my second method about word of mouth from critics and many didn’t care, however, this sources says it effects a movies sale. In the future this can help me by giving me more insight to what advertising influences moviegoers the
The author of my source is an associate professor of computer science at Georgetown University, which means he has a lot of experience with technology. This article was published by the New York Times, which is a known reliable platform to look for information. Even though the author has credibility and the article was published in the New York Times, this source does not have a bibliography or a reference page, which sort of damages some of the credibility of the article.
So, now you have an arsenal of the most important tools to keep your dog from becoming aggressive and attacking other people and other dogs. Getting attacked by a dog is a really scary event because their bites can cause serious injuries or death. It is important to always protect yourself by carrying a dog repellent spray on your keychain for when an unexpected event happens.
Critically evaluate the weaknesses/limitations/problems of the article. Is the work thorough? Fair? Clear? Convincing?
2b) The authors provided the reader a lot of information on the topic. Each topic was very well explored. A lot of different information on different but similar studies. The authors seemed very knowledgeable on the topic. This article lacked a few things. A clear research question and a hypothesis. The paragraphs were not clear and consist, I felt that I had to dig to get certain information. The paper was very wordy, which made me have a hard time understanding the substance.
The author uses diction to shape the tone of the passage. That tone is critical of dog owners, but at the same time showingdisplays a fondness of dogs. You can see this tone throughout the passage in the author’s diction
In order to prevent the perpetuation of misinformation the reader must be able to identify bias in media. For example, “Stephon Clarkson” is essentially neutral death provides the author’s personal opinion why the cops should be charged for this. Source A offers a neutral view about his death and also bais because different sources say he was shot 20 times or 8 times or 10 times. Source B offers a slight bias by only including authoritative quotes from one side, Each analysis of this occasion has different perspective and pros and cons. Readers need to be able to differentiate if it’s bias or real.
7) What biases did you observe in each article? Why do you think they are biases?
Have you ever had a dog? Do you know where dogs came from? Well, did you know that a million of years ago dogs did not exist. Back, then the dogs were wolves that disliked people. The relationship between dogs and humans has changed over time because over thousands of years ago, the wolves evolved to dogs and the dogs soon became part of human families. That is why these days people want to have a dog as a pet.
After reading the articles Dog’s on duty and Service Dogs, Patients Bond Through Health Care Partnership, I decided that the first skill a dog must learn to become a service dog/police dog is a high sense of smell, especially to become a police dog. From the article Dog’s on duty: “He and other police dogs across the country are skilled at sniffing out danger and keeping people safe.” Dogs are said to have a sense of smell 1000 times better than a human being which is helpful if a dog needs to sniff out a bomb or something equally as dangerous. Those are my reasons why I think dogs absolutely need a good sense of smell.
Upon completing the analysis for the first article, a second article was research in the same method as the first, using Capella library. The method in research performed was the exact same with making sure the article results were within 5 years and were peer-reviewed. The second article which was credible was “Improving Systematic Response in the Face of Homicide: Family and Friends of Homicide Victims Service Needs” (Metzger, Mastrocinque, Navratil, & Cerulli, 2015). Upon reading the abstract of the article it was apparent the article used qualitative methodology and appeared to side with my
Scholarly source and magazine articles may share a common level of knowledge on a certain article topic; some magazine articles can be written by a journalist with an extensive knowledge on the article subject (Academic Journals, n.d.). Some magazine articles are to inform the public on its
A service dog named Figo saved a young girl’s life. Figo helped the girl walk when there was no one that thought she could. He even saved the same girl’s life for a horrific accident. Dogs have often been called a man’s best friend. So that is why I believe everyone should own a dog. There are many reasons why you should own a dog. For example dogs improve your health, benefit children greatly, and help reduce stress.
For example, through the whole article, Hellmich backs up her point with many pieces of information, as she displays 5 reliable sources. Nevertheless, in the last paragraph, she had included the reply of the American Beverage Association says “This is an observational study, which cannot and does not show that cardiovascular disease is caused by drinking sugar-sweetened beverages.” This contradicts what she had stated earlier in the text. Apart from this, the article was necessarily germane to the topic. Furthermore, expanding and condensing parts could have made the article better. An example is that they should expand the words of Laurie Schmidt of the University of California-San Francisco, because of the lack of words, and how it is in a repetitive tone from Rachael Johnson. Finally, Hellmich should had been more clear by not writing about all the exceeding numbers of facts , because in the end, it would be arduous to memorize, or to keep in mind of. Although that part could use a bit of improvement, this article was straightforward and
In summary, on 12/20/16 at 2054 hours I was dispatched to 6043 W Roosevelt Rd. (Lucky Dog) in regards to unwanted party with a female subject.
What are the main concepts presented in the article? What information is the author using, and what is its relationship to the main issue? Does the information used appear relevant, significant, valid, and sufficient for the conclusions being drawn? Do you have enough information to determine whether the information is relevant, significant, and valid?