<p>I guess that means we can talk about them now. So, what did everyone write?</p>
<p>For the first one I was pro-advertisements, I completely bombed the second one (changed my mind after writing a page so I crossed it all out and only wound up getting a page and a half of content in, none of which was particularly convincing), and for the last one I was anti-selflessness and disparaged the supposed benefits of it in comparison to incentive-produced advertising at length using hypothetical situations because I couldn't think of any examples.</p>
<p>I don't get why we can't discuss the MC. I mean, they don't reuse the same passages, do they?</p>
<p>For the passage based question I just wrote about how the author used things like imagery and parallel sentence structure to emphasize and point out his opinion that America is a nation of movers. And then I talked about how it was effective that he quoted directly from Rushdie's book and then refuted and discredited Rushdie's arguments immediately after to reinforce his position.</p>
<ol>
<li><p>I argued that advertising was bad; I talked about how it creates unhealthy priorities and mindsets. The general theme of my essay was kind of how it is so insidious; I referred to the one about coffee and mascara preferences and the cigarettes a lot, I remember.</p></li>
<li><p>What did people say for that? I mentioned his appeals to patriotism at the beginning to draw the skeptical reader in with grandiose language, and then the way in which he transitions to a direct, almost sarcastic refutation of Rushdie's quotes, using direct quotes and all, but I'm a little worried that wasn't "deep" enough?</p></li>
<li><p>Not the greatest topic, but I thought of some pretty sweet examples on why incentives are just common sense. It helped that I'd taken AP gov and knew how our country itself was founded on exploiting self interest . . . definitely quoted James Madison there.</p></li>
</ol>
<p>I'd be curious to hear what others wrote about!</p>
<p>I'm worried now about the group of people who are supposed to be objectively grading the essays. In the first one, I made a pen!s joke (in reference to ads that want to "enlarge" your size), but I used a mild euphemism rather than bluntly stating the specific part of the male anatomy in question. So I hope that will be funny and not something to mark me down for.</p>
<p>And in the last essay I made this whole argument that selflessness as a virtue is not something that we should praise or recognize as much as some people would have it because it serves only to inflate senseless pride in the so-called selfless contributors, which in turn could lead to other problems with excesses of pride, notably class distinctions - I pointed out the history of women and black rights here, and then I made a reference to the fact that homosexuals don't even have equal rights yet. This whole argument was bordering off-topic but I couldn't think of anything else to say so I just threw it in there because I had like 6-8 minutes left. I hope my graders aren't homophobes.</p>
<p>^^ We read an entire essay once about sexual dysfunction in society...seriously the entire essay, but it completely stayed on the topic, and got a 9.</p>
<p>So as long as you argued it well, and it flowed appropriately, Im sure youll be fine.</p>
<p>okay::
1st-- i wrote that i was for advertising, but not all types. Like i said if they're for your education or foster good habits, then they're good. But like ads for smoking and misleading things are wrong. Idk if this is exactly what ip ut but it was close to it.</p>
<p>2nd -- there was like a central theme of deathly, miserly thing (like his diction, the images, etc all have like a sad, deathly feel to them) which emphasize his opinion and tone that he hates movers [this isnt exact but i explained it better in the essay] ; then i put historical allusions to show the negative side effects of migration and transfer of ideas, which shows the reason WHY he hates movers and backs up his opinion or something ; then anaphora at the end[idk what i said about this :\ ]</p>
<p>3rd -- um completely b/sed this. somethinga bout Bush and like incentives are okay because you're getting motivated and encouraged to do something which helps other people, which is a good thing. i like defined what charity work was and that the way you approached it would impact it ...yeah complate bullcrap</p>
<ol>
<li><p>I was anti-advertisements...Most of the given sources weren't exactly supporting advertising company. At least, I didn't feel like they did.</p></li>
<li><p>Sanders = Native American. Obviously, he talks about protecting and respecting the land. I'm not sure what the AP graders will be looking for since the author purpose was amazingly overt in this piece.</p></li>
<li><p>I said having an incentive was not necessarily a bad thing as it is akin to teaching children what's good and what's bad. Did anybody talk about classical conditioning for this one?</p></li>
</ol>
<p>for #3, i said that it was unethical for charities to teach someone to be charitable just to get a reward, but then i talked about how the ethics of helping people justifies taking advantage of the people who are giving the $$, supplies, etc. do you think it's okay that i sort of took both sides on it? i mean i just dealt with the unethical part briefly, and spent the rest of my essay explaining how the good outweighed the bad... hopefully that's okay!</p>
<p>and are you sure that Sanders is Native American? i just googled him and it said his father was a cotton farmer and his mother was from an immigrant family...</p>
<p>3 supported...3 didnt</p>
<p>for essay 3 i completely bsed it, but i explained myself well so i think it came out pretty decent. my literary example came out of nowhere... i quoted machiavelli's the prince "the ends justify the means", my historical example was concerning indulgances and achieving glory for enlisting in army, and my personal observations were that 'starving children in african who lost their parents to aids' don't really care if we are given incentives as long as they get food and medicine...</p>
<ol>
<li><p>supported ads. said that they educated people about things going on in society (ie. elections, red cross) and introduces new products that can improve our lives.</p></li>
<li><p>the author was strongly against moving (obviously)</p></li>
<li><p>argued for giving incentives for charitable acts, because they're for a good cause. used salvation army and tax reductions + extra credit points in math class.</p></li>
</ol>
<ol>
<li><p>Argued that advertising is a form of propoganda (defined my terms of course), and that advertising propoganda is not necessarily bad, but sometimes is - i.e. it can use emotional appeals to persuade people to donate blood, but can also use emotional appeals to persuade them that they need things they really don't. I really enjoyed this essay.</p></li>
<li><p>I talked about two strategies: 1-each paragraph began with a claim and followed with support, and the first part of the last paragraph was the main claim, with the subsidiary claims and arguments behind them forming the support for the main claim; the conclusion at the end of the passage was the warrent. 2-deduction/induction - each paragraph was its own example of deduction, and the passage as whole was deduction, except at the end, for the warrent, the author used induction to provide a universal appeal. </p></li>
<li><p>Wrote this one in 20 mins (ack!) - was very concise lol - argued against using incentives on the grounds that they can backfire and create damaging atmosphere of competition - for support cited Freakonomics and the Israeli daycare's attempt at using incentives (if you've read it you know what I'm talking about) and also cited a newspaper article about a class Harvard made mandatory for freshmen about how to be happy (that was the gist of it) because students were so stressed out by the competition incentives create.</p></li>
</ol>
<ol>
<li><p>mixed, first talked about how ads can be used for good (i.e. donating blood, warning about drunk driving, and so on), then talked about how it can hide the fact that products can actually kill you (i.e. tobacco companies, mainly). I mentioned the movie "Thank You For Smoking" and how they (tobacco companies) know what their cigarettes do to people (kill them) but they just want to make a profit. maybe a 7ish score, if they thought it was well-written; perhaps higher (8-9) if they thought it was effective... it went on the fifth page</p></li>
<li><p>this one was okay. I talked first about his diction and second about his imagery, as I moved through his piece from the beginning to the end; related his points for why migration is harmful. I honestly can't remember exactly what I wrote. I always throw in some historical context in my essays, so I'm sure I did that here too. on the fourth page, 6-8 score.</p></li>
<li><p>This one was......special (MAJOR sarcasm in the essay). This one was actually a more natural style for me, as I tend to put more sarcasm in my hand-written essays for some odd reason. but anyways, I talked about how in this age of self-interest and the drive for success, some people forget to step off their pedestal to lend a hand to someone in need; celebrities only do things to make themselves look better; but the rest of us does a charitable act occasionally. Schools should offer extra things to encourage students to take part in community service. Then I talked about how my school requires each student to do community service, no extra credit, and no aid in GPA, either. Perhaps this is why I envy those students who do receive such benefits. But more to the point, I went to volunteer at an Alzheimer's center to fulfill my community service hours requirement. The more I went, the more I came to know the people there, and enjoyed it. Then I went there even after my hours were fulfilled. I actually came to like these, well, "old" people; they led more interesting lives than many of my friends. In the next paragraph, I get a little loopy. I talked about how celebs to charitable acts because the incentives are a better public opinion. Then I went off on Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt and how they went to India to help starving kids and stuff. They did it to get their faces on the front of the tabloids (an insult to real journalism), which is an accomplishment in itself, but the tabloids were forced to show them in a positive light, which is extremely rare! What could be wrong with helping those poor children? They wanted people to think better of them. But for schools, I said offering incentives is good. on the fourth page; 5-9 score, depending on whether the grader thought I stayed on topic, because this is probably one of the more eccentric essays I've written.</p></li>
</ol>
<p>I believe that the Synthesis asked you to "discuss the EFFECTS of advertising" not support or argue against advertising. You just had to talk about its effect.</p>
<p>No, it said DEVELOP A POSITION on the effects of advertising. Meaning, they want you to argue for or against it.</p>
<p>Princeton Review 2006-2007</p>
<p>pg. 62-63</p>
<p>The AP writers will ask you to use the sources in either one of two ways: either to explain something or to argue a point. Thus, the extra reading aside, what this really means si that you'll be either writing another analytical/expository or another argumentative essay.</p>
<p>The prompt itself says...</p>
<p>Develop a position...</p>
<p>==
damn though, I did the explanatory part (failed to read prompt properly). And I think I did a very clear explanation of it, too... I hope this won't result in a score of "-"... =/</p>
<p>advertising has an effect tantamount to that of influencing people subconsciously and effectively causing them to conform to societal standards. But that is more explaining than developing an argument (anti-advertising position was only implied). So much for being a moral relativist! (nonetheless, I did develop an argument for #3 despite my moral relativism)</p>
<p>@icoou-"for essay 3 my literary example came out of nowhere... i quoted machiavelli's the prince "the ends justify the means"</p>
<p>OMG me too! I thought i was the only one haha. I couldnt think of anything to support my side which was incentives are good and then i was like ohhh thats a good quote =)</p>
<p>for #2 i wrote about the allusion to the "promise land", parallel structure, the point counter point argument, imagery...etc</p>
<p>for #1 i said ads were bad because they create a false consenus that its socially acceptable to smoke etc, lowers self esteem, etc</p>
<p>in my synthesis essay, I did refer back to the prompt and describe the effects of advertising on people. For example, when I talked about the blood donation one, I said that it's simple and direct, so it gets people's attention. Then I described the process of someone's thinking when they're looking at the ad (weighing the positive and negatives of donating blood in their head) it turns out that the only reason NOT to give blood, besides health problems, is sheer laziness. So, next comes the guilt, and so on. Then for the smoking, I did something similar, but this time talked about how cigarette companies can get people to smoke even though everyone knows cigarettes are bad for them. They have to slant it in a way that it makes people feel comfortable with the idea of smoking. Sorry, I forgot to include this in the above post.</p>
<p>Re dukebball23: I'm not 100% sure that Sanders is Native American, but that is what one of my teachers told me. When she told me, I thought it made a lot of sense because Sanders talked about respecting the land, having a connection with nature, etc...</p>
<p>icooufoo69, a friend of mine did the exact same thing: she argued that the end justifies the means (and overtly quoted Machiavelli).</p>
<p>Did anybody say that ads dictate what the "social norm" should be? Ads pretty much say what a person must have and cannot have, right? One of my bodies was centered around that...</p>
<p>
[quote]
Did anybody say that ads dictate what the "social norm" should be? Ads pretty much say what a person must have and cannot have, right? One of my bodies was centered around that...
[/quote]
</p>
<p>yes, I did. they basically influence people in a way such that "un-needs" become "needs". One of them is cleanliness. It used to be that no one even cared about whether you took a shower for months or not - now everyone seems to care about that</p>
<h1>oftentimes, the ads unconsciously touch into class preferences as well. they often display people with attributes of the "elite" using their products. And this then becomes ingrained into class consciousness. Certainly I've experienced this a lot - I don't give a **** about how long I go without a shower, or about how many consecutive days that I wear sweatpants, but this causes people to think that I'm poor or something - and my parents take issue with that</h1>
<p>the sad thing is that i could have easily turned my essay into an argumentative essay just by adding a couple of lines into the introduction and into the conclusion.</p>