Literary Analysis of the West Strawman Ad Hominem Technique Mr West’s post provides an excellent text for analysis of contemporary yellow journalism. Due to the richness of the text, the strawman ad hominem hybrid of the first paragraph is examined.
Mr. West begins by assigning false information about Ms. Allen’s post to the list. Cloaked as a mistake, the author of yellow journalism hopes a high percentage of readers will accept the substituted false information as fact. Then, he assigns bad intentions and motivations to his target based on his self-aggrandized analysis of the false information. This is the strawman portion beginning the text. Historically, it tended to stimulate a flurry of posts on the public list before the barking cheese listserv was created. Employing a disingenuous civil tone, the technique moves to the ad hominem portion of the strategy. The author portrays the target as lacking control with an intense unfounded anger. The reader is told, that based on Mr. West’s analysis and hidden information, Ms. Allen lashes out widely at people disconnected with his alliance. (In this case, University of Penn Real Estate and the corporate developers behind the push to change zoning laws.) In short, the hope of the ad hominem strategy relies on the reader immediately dismissing the target’s opinions and information because of her enormous character defects being asserted. Consequently, the author need not refute anything Ms. Allen reports or discusses. The author’s portrayal of himself is that of a wise and principled teacher. His lesson concludes pointing to the target’s unacceptable destructive behavior and mental state with awkward disingenuous flattery. Because of the seeming complexity and wisdom of the author’s analysis, he points out that the targets wildness is at least honest. The text: Glenn, Karen didn't "confirm your accounts"; she said she agreed with you. Karen particularly agrees with you in your intense anger over the 40th & Pine proposal. She is angry not just at people who oppose her, but at undecided people who acknowledge both sides of the dispute. It's a common, if unfortunate, feature of extreme partisanship. I don't think extreme partisanship is healthy in this issue, but it's possible to hold strong views in an honest way, as Karen does. Here is Ms. Allen’s original comment in response to Mr. Moyer’s eyewitness accounts. Mr. West was not in attendance but asserts hidden sources and information. “I agree with everything Glenn says here.” Why does the professional yelllow journalist employ such fallacious techniques? The strawman ad hominem technique is generally employed when dishonest, destructive and unethical objectives are sought. It is simultaneously condescending to readers whom the author views as inferior and hopeful of time constraints for analysis and fact checking. Authors of this literary device generally employ a vast array of technques collectively known as yellow journalism and often become addicted to the process. Literary Analysis of the West Strawman Ad Hominem Technique by Glenn Moyer September 2008 -----Original Message----- >From: Anthony West <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Sent: Sep 3, 2008 10:43 PM >To: univcity <[email protected]> >Subject: Re: [UC] UCHS and SHCA politics > >Glenn, > >Karen didn't "confirm your accounts"; she said she agreed with you. >Karen particularly agrees with you in your intense anger over the 40th & >Pine proposal. She is angry not just at people who oppose her, but at >undecided people who acknowledge both sides of the dispute. It's a >common, if unfortunate, feature of extreme partisanship. I don't think >extreme partisanship is healthy in this issue, but it's possible to hold >strong views in an honest way, as Karen does. > >Karen listed several points on which she felt she had been dissed by a >group she is a member of, that inherently owes her some duties. We don't >have to agree with her take on them, but they were all cogent and >specific, not embroidered with emotive interpretation. > >The problem with your habit of accusing everyone you disagree with of >being a "conspirator" is that you never adduce any evidence of an actual >conspiracy. There are many, many reasons why factions disagree with each >other and conspiracy is seldom the best explanation for either side's >behavior. With no real evidence, it's just empty partisan rhetoric. > >In the case at hand, one could just as easily accuse the anti-hotel >faction of being a "conspiracy". Clearly it holds private meetings and >off-line strategy discussions, etc. But that's the way of the world! >There's nothing wrong with it. Both sides can do it. > >To charge a conspiracy without meaningful evidence is untruthful. Let's >all lay low on this sort of talk for a while. There are other ways to >explain conflict. Better to have partisanship without falsity. > >For instance, what you just said below: There was never any such thing >as the "UCD/FOCP Quality of Life Task Force" (a now-obscure issue that >surfaced briefly around 2001, I think). There were two separate groups >in two separate bodies. It was complex. People who worked with you then >(that was before my time) said you never seemed to grasp which body you >were working with at any given time. > >-- Tony West > > >> Hahaha. I love it when West details my lies from events he didn't attend. >> When I detailed the UCD/FOCP Quality of Life 0+1Task force for the list, he >> also detailed my lies in his brilliant condescending manner to you little >> people. Even when he is not present, he can explain my bad and evil nature >> to all of you because none of you are brilliant like Mr. Tony West-hahaha. >> Of course the non-existant but veracious, Karen, confirmed my accounts in >> question. > > > >---- >You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the >list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see ><http://www.purple.com/list.html>. ---- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see <http://www.purple.com/list.html>.
