Between George F. Will's "Earth's quaky design" and Robert Novak's "House GOP somersault", I was compelled to read Will's editorial over Novak's. I think the reason for this is that Novak's article had a lot of back story that I wasn't familiar with...
as I was reading Will's article, I noticed that he employed two out of the three characteristics found in editorial writing. He used persuasion and information.
The general structure of his editorial consisted of general, specific, technicality, general with application of technicality, specific with the effects of technicality, and lastly three examples of the results through out time.
The first general statement he mentioned dealt with the world (mentioning Pakistan and Asia). His specific is the United States. Why they should care and how do they fit within this context.
For the technicality, he provided us with general background of how tectonic plates functioned. He used this information and applied it to the world and the United States (specifically San Francisco).
Why should we care? because, not only would the earthquake devastate its point of destruction, but it could also affect neighboring locals not exactly the point of target. The earthquake could take place in Japan, and Los Angelos can still be affected by this even though it's thousands of miles apart from Japan.
As a result, religious fanaticism became rampant causing mayhem. Through his use of scientific information Will tries to persuade us that this potential geological disaster will not only destroy homes but also cause disorder.
Posted by Michael Diezmos at October 11, 2005 9:38 PM