Sydnee Rudolph

4/14/15
M/W 3-5pm

When the Rivers Run Dry

For many years leading up to our present day, California has been experiencing less and
less of a rain season. May showers are growing shorter, and this certainly has an affect on how
many May flowers they actually provide. The biggest question being whispered amongst the
population is How much? How much water can we continue to waste before we truly run dry?
How long can we wait before we actually start caring about water conservation? How long
before its too late? The answers to these questions vary depending on who is answering them,

oCm
ete
nd [ZD
1]: I like your use of rhetorical questions and repetition
here. Nice job, Syd.

but currently they all have come to agree on one statement. If California does not take definitive
action soon, they will deplete their one natural resource that is essential to human survival;
Water. Researching the countless opinions on this crucial topic, one can tailor their search to

oCm
ete
nd [ZD
2]: Semicolons separate two complete sentences. Check
this out: http://writingcenter.unc.edu/handouts/semi-colonscolons-and-dashes/

range from liberal to conservative, and that is what this paper will examine. One can also sift
through many articles examining the drought from all angles, however here we will specifically
focus on what article comes up under the search California Drought Responses. The aim here
is to analyze the different ways in which different viewpoints believe California should handle
the drought situation.
To begin with one of the more Liberal websites, we will first observe the online news
columns on this topic from the Huffington Post. The first thing they present is the authors name
and a link to another source of his work. This being the initial piece of information lets the reader

oCm
ete
nd [ZD
3]: Im not quite sure what youre arguing here.
Remember: your reader is most likely going to be expecting
a thesis statement at the end of your Intro (or occasionally
2nd paragraph) that clearly detail what
point/argument/stance theyre taking and what evidence
theyre basing that on. Right now, I dont know where
youre taking me.
Also: what viewpoints? What sources? What writers? And
why those, and not others?
oCm
ete
nd [ZD
4]: What about them? Topic sentences are like idea
anchors they set the ideas that youll focus on in your
paragraph, and this will help the reader anticipate whats
coming upso when you start diving deep, theyll likely
see it coming.

know that if they are unsure about the validity of the text, they can decide for themselves how
credible the author is. Following this is a short, bold title stating the articles focus, and an equally
unassuming photo of, specifically, the droughts affects on nature. Onto our main focus, the
liberal stance on this matter is that the ways in which California is currently attempting to
improve the drought situation are actually worsening it. Once this stance is presented, the article
supports its claims by providing scientific evidence of the effects of the current strategies. Such
facts are bulleted and read something like this: During the drought, California's hydropower

oCm
ete
nd [ZD
5]: The textual evidence is good; the somewhat casual
tone isnt.

was roughly halved. This lost hydropower was largely replaced with the purchase and
combustion of additional natural gas. (Sustainability Science, Springer, Pacific Institute) Within
this quote, we see the fact itself followed by its negative effect. To provide even more credibility
to the article, graphs and charts follow the textual information. The type of arguments presented
here can be compared to those discussed in Lunsfords Everything is an Argument under the
section Arguments to convince. Lunsford describes these as arguments that identify their
audience, here being the liberal and academic population of California, and presents evidence

om
C
ete
nd [ZD
6]: Nice tie-in to our readings.

that there is cause for their concern. The overall suggestion to Californians from The Huffington
Post articles is to halt their current short-term emergency responses, and to progress toward a
long-term system of conservation.
The next group of online text was found from the Google News Source, which provides a

om
C
ete
nd [ZD
7]: Im not sure what you mean here.

point of view that is neither strongly conservative nor liberal, but that caters to the average
respondent. Such articles begin with a long-winded title that states the problem and follows with
a vague or obvious statement such as We need solutions! Like The Huffington Post, they
follow the title with a photo that focuses on the affects the drought is having on nature. These
photos include dried ground and leafless trees, but also show a person or two to emphasize the

om
C
ete
nd [ZD
8]: Average in terms of age? Weight? Height?
om
C
ete
nd [ZD
9]: OK, so a couple things:
1, what do you mean by such articles? What articles? Do
you want to use this piece to generalize for the genres,
overall? If so, you can, but be careful about that.
2, Im still not really seeing what youre trying to prove or
get across in this paper. What claims are you trying to
make? (And what genres are you focusing on? Im not
entirely sure.)

gravity of what we humans are doing to our land. They include a quick description, then move
on to the main stance of the average Californian: Something is being done, but its not enough
because theres so many of us, and here are some more ideas on what to do to help. The tone is
less scientific than those previously discussed, and uses broader terms. There is talk of what the
governor, Jerry Brown, is doing in terms of regulating water usage, however his plans are seen as
inadequate and the articles then shift over to other credible sources of plans for change. One
article cites Keith Schneider, senior editor of The Circle Blue, (a news source that covers the
global water situation). He suggests California begin considering water recycling, which takes
used water and sends it back to the groundwater to allow the process of extracting drinkable
groundwater to continue. Schneider and others with the middle-ground point of view are focused
on a big-picture solution for water conservation. They invoke broad, general concerns and
appeal to something (their) audience already figures to care about(Birkenstein & Graff, pg.
97). Though they provide less scientific facts than others, they make their arguments personal to

om
C
ete
nd [ZD
10]: Another solid tie-in

their audience and promote a collective mindset among Californias immense population.
The last group of publications left to touch on, the Conservatives, will be observed
utilizing one of the most conservative online news sources, Fox News. Closer to the format of
The Huffington Post, Fox News usually begins with a bolded, short and to-the-point title

oCm
ete
nd [ZD
11]: OK, now I get it: youre taking a look at this CA
drought issue based on the political affiliations of the
sources.
Thats good and smart, but still, the focus of this assignment
needs to be analyzing the same textual genres. Are you
doing that?

identifying the purpose of the article. They continue on with a photo, like the previous types of
text, which focuses on the person in the picture with barren land and minimal water source
pictured behind them. Having the focal point be the person instead of the land brings attention to
humans as the main contributors to water source depletion. The text that follows is unlike that of
the previous pieces in that it is lengthier and more verbose. For example, one article that places
the blame on Californias Delta Farmers contains sentences such as this: At issue is California's

om
C
ete
nd [ZD
12]: Good observation.

century-old water rights system that has been based on self-reporting and little oversight,
historically giving senior water rights holders the ability to use as much water as they need, even
in drought. This article tells of a corrupt and out-of-date water system that allows the Delta
Farmers to take as much water as theyd like without regulation. The tone is accusatory towards
these farmers and the text continues along the assumption of accuracy without much
documentation, which shows when it says, we dont know if there (are) illegal diversions going
on at this timea large information gap exists.(Nancy Vogel, Dept. of Water Resources).

om
C
ete
nd [ZD
13]: Nice use of textual evidence.

Typically the purpose of these writings is to find someone to blame for the states water
shortcomings, suggest a way to regulate them and, in turn, resolve the issue in its entirety.
On the surface, these three points of view press the idea that if nothing is done quickly to

oCm
ete
nd [ZD
14]: This comment is in reference to the whole
paragraph:

move toward conserving the water California still has left, it will be too late. They are similar in
format, beginning with an eye-grabbing title, followed by a photo that provides a physical

When I see thiseven before I start readingI think,

Ahhhhhhh! Attack of the page-long paragraph!
See if you like this metaphor:

representation of the grave affects of the drought. They differ on the points made by their
articles, however they each aim to convince their audiences of the validity of their argument and
the efficiency of their proposals for resolution. Consistent with ideas from Boyds Murder!
(Rhetorically Speaking), the conservative side carefully chooses which details to include and
which to do away with to convince its readers of its purpose, while the liberals provide scientific
opinions accompanied by evidence to back up their claims. The middle-ground articles simply
constructed their argument to be easily understandable and relatable to the public. The reasons
for such differences are obvious if one has a basic understanding of how the viewpoints vary
along the spectrum from liberal to conservative. Each will have the same end goal, a call to
action for its audience, however the path to reach it will align with each groups specific
opinions. This is where one can observe the value of studying genre. A reader without an

Pretend your whole paper is a big, juicy steak. Do you want

your reader to enjoy that steak in easy-to-chew, digestable
bites? Or do you want them to start eating the whole thing in
one piece (think: zombie).
Paragraphs are like those bites. Give your reader your
argument in little, digestable, one-idea-at-a-time bits.
Readers need to be able to see the different parts/pieces/bites
of the argument that theyre chewing on.

understanding of the concept might read the three different types of articles and think they are all
relatively similar. They might believe that the only issue here is finding a solution to our lack of
water. They would not notice the differences in context on such arguments across each piece, nor
would they pick up on the involvement of different political stances or economic beliefs involved
in the diction and tone of each work. Understanding the way the conventions of a genre interact
allows one to deduce for themselves which position is the most factual, which is more focused
on opinions, which provides solely basic information on the topic, and how all of these articles
come together to provide an understanding of the dire situation at hand and the necessity of a
quick and effective solution.