Turn to Exercise 27, page. 38
(See Checklist for Technique Identification). Use this checklist as the basis for the following “taking it further” exercises.
Facts and figures and logic/common sense appeal: The editor relies on facts and figures to prove that obese jetsetters are having a big impact on the cost of air travel. They state that the airlines in the United States are now spending an extra $5 billion on fuel because of the extra weight of the aircraft.
Facts, figures and comparisons: The author also uses statistics comparatively to prove that during the past 90 years the average weight of people has increased and therefore action must be taken to ensure that people pay fairly.
Appeal to common sense: the author states that obese jetsetters are a drain on the airline’s fuel bill.
Rhetorical questions: and a provocative tone (“who is paying for this increase?”)
The professional expert, Mr Webber (former Qantas chief economist) who is a trusted economist with airline experience, offers his logical opinion, that obese jetsetters must pay according to their contribution to the cost of airline travel. He states that it is obvious that the heavier a person, the heavier the aircraft and therefore the cost of fuel increases (appeal to common sense).
Comparative real-life examples are used to prove that there is a solution; the author uses the real-life example of Samoa Air and Southwest Airlines to show that other airlines are trying to cope with the increasing problem of overweight passengers. This example seeks to justify and defend the tax.
Negative and emotive words: The word, “fat tax” highlights the fairness of the tax.
Tone: A censorious tone is evident as the author seeks to adopt the high moral ground and suggest practical alternatives.
Inclusive language: “you and me” to alarm members of the public that they are subsidising overweight jetsetters.
Comparisons: the author compares the “fat tax” to increased prices in other industries to justify the tax. Comparisons: For example disabled people have to pay more to catch a taxi; insurance policies often discriminate against citizens; these comparisons show that it is fairer to have a user-pay principle.
Appeal to anger/indignation: “in the interests of passenger comfort”: seeks to provoke anger with regards to the cost of overweight passengers and increased prices.
Colloquial language: “what a load of bunkum”
Rebuttal and attack on opposing views that cite equality
Appeal to fairness and equality: the user pay principle suggests that all customers should pay their fair price and should not pay because of the size of others.
Moral appeal and shaming tactics: seeks to isolate and shame overweight people because their obesity is leading to increased airline costs.
Return to Summary Page: turn to exercises