Page 15 - 2023-bfw-TLC-4e

Guenther makes a sophisticated argument here — one that stems, in part, from her
2
response to the 2018 report released by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change,
stating “in no uncertain terms that climate change will threaten the lives of hundreds
of millions of people in the next decades unless greenhouse-gas emissions halve in
10 years and cease entirely in 30” (par. 2). This expert opinion gives her a jumping-off
Argument
spot for her argument. But it is the tweet of a climate journalist that she is really arguing
with. Not quite an anecdote, it is what we might call testimony, a response to an event by
someone other than the writer. She argues that the use of “we” in the tweet is evidence
of an assumption of complicity, and she strongly disagrees.
Guenther uses as evidence a list of people who couldn’t possibly be complicit in
climate change: those living on under $10 a day, the hundreds of thousands of people
who don’t just march but who work on lowering their own emissions, climate writer Bill
McKibben, climate activist Greta Thunberg, Indigenous people, and children. She doesn’t
just list them; she provides facts for each. It is hard to argue with such specificity.
Guenther provides quantitative evidence too. She invokes the 10 percent of the world’s
population that produce 50 percent of the world’s global emissions and provides examples
of how that happens. She calls out the news media too, but in a way that is more anecdotal
than qualitative; she accuses them of underreporting or not reporting at all on climate
change. Because her evidence is varied and lively, Guenther’s argument packs a punch.

activity Analyzing Evidence

The following opinion piece, by journalist Tina Rosenberg, appeared in the New York
Times in 2020. Identify the types of evidence Rosenberg uses in her argument and
discuss the effect of those choices on the argument as a whole.

Hi, There. Want to Triple Voter Turnout?

Tina Rosenberg

Turnout decides elections. Phone calls are very effective when a volun-
Many people have thought about how a teer can reach someone. But volunteers are
campaign can get its supporters to the polls. fortunate if five people pick up the phone
And what they’ve come up with is . . . not great. every hour.
The best techniques make a difference when In 2018, campaigns began to send thousands 5
armies of volunteers use them. But the tech- of text messages, designed to “cut through the
niques are inefficient, frustrating for volunteers clutter.” Now they are the clutter. People see
and annoying to voters. them but don’t engage. About 6 percent of
Campaigns make calls and send texts. But vot- recipients text back — and half of those are
ers in swing states, under siege, have learned to saying “go away.”
ignore any unknown caller or texter until Nov. 4.

Tina Rosenberg, “Hi, There. Want to Triple Voter Turnout?” The New York Times, September 19, 2020. Copyright © 2020 by The New York Times. All rights
reserved. Used under license. https://nytimes.com/
72

Uncorrected proofs have been used in this sample. Copyright © Bedford, Freeman & Worth Publishers.
Distributed by Bedford, Freeman & Worth Publishers.
For review purposes only. Not for redistribution.
03_sheatlc4e_40925_ch02_058_111_4pp.indd 72 8/9/22 2:54 PM