UNH The Analysis of Symbolic Drama? & The Analysis of Identification & Division Essay Do the part of the analysis of symbolic drama and the ANALYSIS OF IDE

UNH The Analysis of Symbolic Drama? & The Analysis of Identification & Division Essay Do the part of the analysis of symbolic drama and the ANALYSIS OF IDENTIFICATION AND DIVISIONwhat I choose is the https://www.nhpr.org/post/nh-lobstermen-lament-coming-regulations-prevent-right-whale-entanglements#stream/0. Also I put the syllubus, first and second report, definition,and everything in the following document. Please read through the syllubus to see what I study and all of them and do it. The rubic is the most important one. Thank you! Term Project Report #1
According to Cox and Pezzullo (2018), rhetorical exigence is defined as “a set of
conditions that have been constituted as a problem, grievance, or crisis that becomes marked by a
sense of urgency” (p. 55). The rhetorical exigence that is being defined in our project is the issue
of injuries and deaths to the North Atlantic right whales due to entanglement in fishing gear. This
issue caught the attention of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
after there were 17 North Atlantic right whale deaths in 2017. The NOAA announced these
casualties as an Unusual Mortality Event (Sullivan), and due to this they said that they would
consider new regulations to protect the North Atlantic right whales. Cheri Patterson, supervisor
of marine programs at New Hampshire Fish and Game said that NOAA is expected to make a
decision on new regulations by the end of the year in 2019.
Cox and Pezzullo state that a public sphere is “a discursive space that is created when
individuals engage others in communication – through conversation, argument, debate, or
questioning – about subjects of shared concern or topics that affect a wider community” (2018, p.
21). In other words, this is a space where people can talk about concerns or topics in the public
eye. The public spheres involved with the right whale protection are town meetings, letters
between organizations, and various online articles. An article written by Max Sullivan states that
there was a town meeting held in Portsmouth to discuss the issue and to brainstorm ways of
altering the rope so that it would break to give the whales a chance to break free, compared to
being entangled. Erik Anderson, who leads the New Hampshire Commercial Fishermen’s
Association is in charge of leading the town meetings held in Portsmouth. Anderson is frustrated
that the federal regulators haven’t given any specifications stated in NHPR’s January 17, 2020
article because they were supposed to come up with specifications by the end of the 2019 year.
Erica Fuller, senior staff attorney with Conservation Law Foundation also believes that NOAA
needs to speed up the process with the regulations. She states that identifying the problem is a
start; however, the regulators need to do more and faster. NH1 also has taken the time to analyze
this issue. In their article, they state that the Maine Lobstermen’s Association’s executive
director Patrice McCarron sent a letter to NOAA’s regional administrator Mike Pentony saying
that the lobstermen are committed to identifying conservation measures to improve protections
for right whales. McCarron believes that it is integral for lobstermen to support the methodology
used to make the new rules. These three articles are both public spheres because it is allowing
public, outside sources to talk about the issue.
“Ownership refers to the ability to create and influence the public definition of a
problem” (Cox and Pezzullo, 2018, p. 79). In the case of the right whales, NOAA is vying for
ownership of the problem. They are the ones who own the problem because they are responsible
for deciding on the new regulations that will be put in place for the right whales. While NOAA is
vying for ownership, the lobstermen aren’t trying to disown the problem. Disowning a public
problem is “acts of word and deed that distance a party from the problem” (p. 80). The
lobstermen aren’t distancing themselves from the issue; instead, they are aware of the problem
and are assisting in resolving the issue.
Causal responsibility refers to a “shared belief about the sequence of occurrences that
factually accounts for the existence of a problem” (p. 81). Causal responsibility in this situation
is being assigned to both the lobstermen and the equipment being used. NOAA assigns
responsibility to the lines because they are the objects that are tangibly responsible for the whales
being entangled. On the other hand, the lobstermen are also causally responsible because they are
the group that is setting the lines to catch the lobster. While the lobstermen hold causal
responsibility, NOAA holds political responsibility because they are the party responsible for
resolving the problem. Political responsibility is defined as “assertions that some office of group
is obligated to do something about the problem” (p. 81). NOAA is ultimately responsible for
coming up with and putting into place the new regulations to protect the right whales. Sam
Rauch is an integral part of NOAA is NOAA Fisheries’ deputy assistant administrator for
regulatory programs, who have a good idea of what’s going on, and believes this is a great
opportunity to reduce the impacts of U.S. fisheries on animals. Rauch understands that the
consequences to the fishermen are real and difficult so they need to be aware of the choices
being made down the line. The Large Atlantic Whale Take Reduction Team will present the
lobstermen’s preferred options and this team advises NOAA fisheries, who will make the final
decision. Lucky for the lobstermen, Kristan Porter is also a part of the Whale Take Reduction
Team. Porter is the President of the Maine Lobstermen’s Association so she has a say in how the
problem is going to be resolved, along with being a part of the association that could be harmed.
This is important to the lobstermen because Porter can say something if the measures against the
equipment seems too harsh. In this position, Porter is trying to digest what it means for the
fishery and what the nexts steps are.
Some members of the lobstermen are skeptical about the measures being taken by
NOAA because they are worried about the consequences to the fishery. Ward Bryne is a
lobsterman out of Portsmouth and he stated “a closure would break our back… NOAA could
come down and hand a ruling down that’s not good for fishermen, and we’re done” (Sullivan).
Another lobsterman named Chris Adamaitis also has a similar stance on the issue. Adamaitis
stated that the new regulations could mean new trouble for the fishery and believes that if the
fishery had a chance of failing, it would be due to the whale issue. Many of the lobstermen are
skeptical that their fishery poses enough of a threat to the whales to merit new regulations
(Ropeik). As discussed in a town meeting in January 2020, the lobstermen want more detail and
input on the new, more easily breakable lines or gear being implemented to reduce whale
entanglement. The meeting disclosed that the lobstermen wouldn’t need to make changes until
Fall 2020 at the earliest, and would receive $1.6 million in federal funding to help adopt the new
rules.
“Properly speaking, a rhetorical audience consists only of those persons who are capable
of being influenced by discourse and of being mediators of change” (Lloyd Bitzer, quoted in
Hauser, p. 48). The rhetorical audience in this situation would be the Lobstermen’s Association
and NOAA. The lobstermen can be influenced by what NOAA has to say and the implications
their gear has on the right whales. On the other side of things, NOAA can be influenced by the
lobstermen on the new regulations that should be set in place. While many people can form an
opinion based on the discourse between parties, they do not have power to be mediators of
change in this situation. Rhetorical constraints are defined as “the limitations and the
opportunities present in a situation that bear on what may or may not be said to the audience
about the imperfection they are being asked to remedy” (Hauser, p. 50). After analyzing multiple
articles, there does not seem to be any restraints on what each party can disclose. As of right
now, there are no constraints on this issue. Each party has been open on what is being said and
received.
References
Associated Press. (2019, April 29). New england lobstermen are being asked to reduce their
gear
in order to save whales. Retrieved from https://nh1.com/nh1/new-england-lobstermenare-being-asked-to-reduce-their-gear-in-order-to-save-whales/
Cox, R., & Pezzullo, P.C. (2018). Environmental communication and the public sphere. Los
Angeles: SAGE.
Hauser, G.A. (2002). Introduction to rhetorical theory. Rhetorical Opportunities. (2nd ed., pp.
47-60). Long Grove: Waveland Press, Inc.
Ropeik, A. (2020, January 17). NH lobstermen lament coming regulations to prevent right whale
entanglements. Retrieved from
https://www.nhpr.org/post/nh-lobstermen-lament-coming-regulations-prevent-rightwhale
-entanglements#stream/0
Sullivan, M. (2019, January 26). Lobstermen look to change gear to cut risk to whales. Retrieved
from
https://www.fosters.com/news/20190126/lobstermen-look-to-change-gear-to-cut-risk-towhales
Term Project Report #2
Issue Analysis
Analysis of Terministic Screens
Kenneth Burke (1966) describes terministic screens as the means whereby discourse
orients us to see certain things or aspects of the world and not others. He further quotes “If
any given terminology is a reflection of reality, by its very nature as a terminology it must be a
selection of reality; and to this extent it must function also as a deflection of reality” (p. 45,
emphasis in original).
Analysis of Identification and Division
Hauser (2002) explains identification as, “identification with, whereby we find that our
ways are the same” (213). Hauser provides a contrasting example of how he doesn’t want
identification to be perceived. He talks about how he is not referring to his identification of the
picture before him as his son or the sounds outside his windows as birds chirping.
According to Hauser (2002), consubstantiality means there is an essential nature that is
shared in common. He uses an example that says, “We are likely to identify with whatever
embodies positive attitudes toward the means that will further our ends. We are likely to define
value in terms of personal gain” (217).
Still need definition of division
Analysis of Dominant and Critical Discourses
Dominant discourse is when discourse gains a broad or taken-for-granted status in
culture, or when its meanings help legitimize certain practices (Cox & Pezzullo, 2018, 61). An
example of taken-for-granted status would be “drinking water is good for your health”. On the
other side, buying bottled water because it is the cleanest, most convenient choice would be an
example of legitimizing certain practices.
Cox and Pezzullo (2018) define critical discourses as the alternative ways of speaking,
writing, or portraying the environment through art, music, and photos (61). An example of
critical discourse is displayed through the Slow Food movement, which promotes local food
cultures and “good clean, fair food”.
References
Burke, K. (1966). Language as a symbolic action: Essays on life, literature, and method.
Berkeley: University of California Press.
Cox, R., & Pezzullo, P.C. (2018). Environmental communication and the public sphere. Los
Angeles: SAGE.
Hauser, G. A. (2002). Acting with language. In Introduction to rhetorical theory. (2nd ed., pp.
201-218). Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland Press, Inc.
CMN 656: ENVIRONMENTAL COMMUNICATION AND RHETORIC
Instructor:
Office:
Phone:
Office Hours:
Professor Lawrence Prelli
125 Horton Social Science Center
862-3034; email: Lawrence.prelli@unh.edu
Monday and Wednesday, 11:00-12:00, 3:30-4:30, and by appointment
Course Description and Objectives
Students learn to conduct analyses of public discourses about environmental problems
using concepts of rhetoric and communication. Those analyses involve disclosing
alternative perspectives toward those problems, how those perspectives frame issues, and
the ways those framings constrain audience response to environmental problems.
Students work together on a semester-long case study in which they analyze, evaluate,
and respond to a discourse about an important nation-wide, if not international,
environmental problem as it is manifested locally in a nearby seacoast area town.
Prereq: CMN 455, 456, and 457 with C or better and a C- or better in two 500-level CMN
courses with different 400-level prerequisites. Permission is required for any exceptions
to these prerequisites. Environmental Communication and Rhetoric is a writing intensive
course.
Required Readings
Robert Cox and Phaedra C. Pezzullo, Environmental Communication and the Public
Sphere, 5th ed. (Los Angeles, CA: Sage, 2016). (Available at Durham Book
Exchange.)
myCourses: Full-text versions of other course readings are available at our course
website.
Course Requirements
Individual Observation Papers: Each student is required to submit two individual
observation papers. You will have four opportunities to submit these papers. An
individual observation paper is a 3-4 page paper that uses a course concept to analyze an
instance of communication about an environmental issue. (If you want, you can write
three papers and I will drop the lowest of the three grades.) Your analysis should include
(1) a brief description of the communicative text, event, or action in its original context
(e.g., What it is? Who enacted it? Where did you encounter it? When did it happen?); (2)
a clear exposition of the concept or concepts that you are using to guide your analysis,
making direct quotation from relevant sources in support; (3) your analysis of the
communication in terms of how well your selected concept or concepts disclose the
communication’s influence (or failure to influence) those who become audience to it or
those involved with it (including you if relevant); and (4) your conclusions about what
you learned about environmental communication from the analysis. If possible, provide a
copy of the communication. Each Individual Observation Paper is worth 15% for a total
of 30% of your final grade.
Reading Quizzes: The assigned reading is important because it acquaints you with ideas
and practices related to environmental communication. For that reason, there will be four
1
quizzes consisting of twenty multiple-choice or true-false questions on concepts from
readings and related classroom applications. The quizzes will take the first thirty minutes
of the eighty-minute class period. I will solicit your input on ideas, documents, persons or
groups that you think are especially important to know as a practitioner of environmental
communication. I will drop your lowest score if and only if you take all four quizzes and
do not earn less than a 12/20 or 60% on the last quiz administered during finals week.
Otherwise, all four quizzes will be averaged for your overall quiz grade, including zeros
for missed quizzes. Each quiz will count for 5% of your grade for a total of 15%.
Environmental Communication Group Project: The purpose of this group project (3-4
students) is to select an environmental problem in a seacoast area town and conduct an
analysis of communication about that problem. Your group will be engaging with real
problems experienced by real people from a communicative perspective. The final project
will yield 45% of your final grade, distributed as follows:
Group Observations: Your group project involves analysis of communication on
an environmental issue. The group observations are designed to help you identify
relevant communication for analysis. You will complete three group observations
related to your group project. The three group observations are incorporated
respectively in the three term project reports (TPRs) and, thus, are considered part
of the group grades for those three reports.
Term Project Reports: The purpose of the three 3-5 page group term project
reports (TPRs) is to allow you to write your final paper in increments that include
central concepts of communication analysis that help you answer questions
necessary for writing a good to excellent final project paper. These papers are
group productions and must incorporate group observations. The reports are each
worth 10% of your final grade, for a total of 30% of your final grade.
The Final Term Project: Your final task is to integrate your previous work with
additional inquiry and study as needed to produce an incisive analysis of
environmental communication, complete with recommendations for maintaining
or improving communication about the problem. Your group will produce a 1012 page, double-spaced, well-documented paper, plus appendices. One of those
appendices will contain the group’s use of the analytical results EITHER to
(1) formulate an advocacy position on the problem that you studied OR (2) assess
the rhetorical ecology of the public spheres where communication took place in
terms of whether they enabled or restricted communication about the problem.
The final project report is worth 10% of your final grade.
Individual work on the project: Based on peer evaluations and my observations,
you will earn an individual grade on your group work. This is worth 5% of your
final grade.
Participation: This class requires thoughtful student participation. The seminar format
requires that students are prepared, ready, and willing to participate. Unlike more general
lecture and discussion formats, we cannot earn the benefits of a seminar format without
2
meeting those requirements. That means you are expected to complete all assigned
readings and activities before class and to come to class ready to explore ideas in an
informed fashion. Much as a collaborative spirit is needed for effective group work, so
too is that spirit necessary for the seminar as a whole. The seminar is the place to discuss
issues encountered in conducting our individual and group work so that we can learn
from one another’s experiences. Participation will amount to 10% of your final grade.
Class Policy Notes:
1.
Absences and Attendance Policy: To ensure your confidentiality all “excused”
absences require a letter from the Associate Academic Dean of your college that
confirms your excuse request is based upon documented evidence of nonacademic circumstances beyond your control. The dean will notify all of your
professors and instructors in writing, asking them to decide whether to grant an
excused absence based upon that confirmation. Be advised that leaving early or
returning late for extended vacations, giving priority to work schedules over class
schedules, and appointments with doctors, dentists, auto mechanics, or anyone
else during class meeting times will not be considered sufficient reasons for an
excused absence. The only exception to this policy is for athletes who must travel
with their teams for meets or games. The athletics department will furnish athletes
with schedule information for your instructors’ consideration. Practices are not
excused. Otherwise, there are no exceptions to this policy. Please do no email me
or ask me directly to grant an excused absence for any other reason. See section
4.13 of the 2019-2020 Student Rights, Rules, and Responsibilities at Student
Rights, Rules and Responsibilities Academic Policies, 04-Attendence and Class
Requirements.
If you miss class more than twice for any reason, excused or unexcused, I will
reduce your final grade unless asked to consider otherwise in a letter from your
college dean. Starting with the third absence your final grade will be reduced
one grade level. Thus, a B becomes a B- with three absences, a C+ with four
absences, and so on. With six absences – fully three weeks of the course — I will
notify the Associate Academic Dean of your college and request your removal
from the course for unsatisfactory class participation (see section 4.15 of Student
Rights, Rules, and Responsibilities).
Use absences when you really need them and you should have no difficulty
meeting your responsibilities under this attendance policy. If you anticipate
difficulties getting to class, or you allow others to make decisions about your
schedule for you, or you have trouble meeting your academic responsibilities, this
is not th…
Purchase answer to see full
attachment