Why the Scientific Case Against Fracking Keeps Getting Stronger.
Cultural Analysis
Keywords
"Earthquake"
"Contamination"
"Fugitive Methane"
Main Argument
Scientific evidence proves the
harm that hydraulic fracking shale can
cause to the environment.
Harm to the environment include: earthquakes, higher methane in the atmosphere, and water contamination
Cultural Setting
Norms/ Beliefs/ Laws of the Culture
Bias of the expert being interviewed
"vehemently against the use of shale to produce hydrocarbons"
"...I spent 20-25 years working with the oil and gas industry...helping them figure out how best to get oil and gas out of rock" (Mooney)
Opposite bias, makes the source more credible and gives the source more validity.
Beliefs: the need for a balance between a sustainable energy source and remaining eco-friendly in producing the energy.
How are these values/ beliefs/ laws being addressed in the text?
Balance between remaining green and maintaining an reliable energy source is mentioned directly as it is the basis of the entire text.
Balance between companies remaining profitable and green is mentioned only indirectly and is not the main focus of the text.
What is the relationship
between the text and
the values/ beliefs?
Text is written to modify the the belief that fracking is the best source of clean energy.
The text presents evidence to suggest that fracking is more harmful to the environment than people believe.
Earthquakes
Fugitive methane raising the methane levels in the atmosphere and not being regulated properly
Water Contamination from the leftover fracking fluid
Message Analysis
Strategies related to the message and purpose
Express an idea or opinion
Inform the reader about a topic that is often misunderstood
The entire text is a persuasive text to persuade the reader, through the use of scientific fact that fracking is bad for the environment.
The quantity of information provided, instead of purely commentary, shows the goal of the text is to inform the reader
Defining the variables: Chris Mooney's interviewee emphasizes the difference between shale fracking and other uses of hydraulic fracking.
Strategies not used in the text
Responding to a particular occasion or event.
Fracking has been used for
years as a way to get gas and
oil out of rocks.
Earthquakes are used as examples and evidence, not as the main focus of why fracking is bad. These examples are used more to support the text.
Rhetorical Strategies
Appeals to Credibility
Personal Information
Uses his political affiliation to strengthen his credibility as non-biased by going against what his party typically believes in.
"nd now the reason I bring it up in the context of politics is that the right, the political right uses this as a central case study for liberals getting science wrong...But since that time the science has evolved and developed in particular the research has gotten clearer on two subjects that you've got to call pretty concerning.."
Credible Sources
Interviews an expert who has worked in the fracking industry for 20-25 years and is a researcher at Cornell.
Word Choice
Uses some scientific terms, but not too many making the article impossible to understand.
Appeals to Emotion
This article focuses more on a logical appeals to express the opinion.
Expected emotional response: informed annoyance
The lack of emotional traps actually makes the article more credible,. Because this article focuses on the scientific evidence, the lack of emotional draws keeps the focus on the factual evidence.
Appeals to Logic
Interview and expert opinion
Arrangement of text for emphasis.
Uses a credible source for information
Keeps the emphasis on the facts provided without hiding them behind scientific or emotional jargon .