Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
As the threat of global warming is becoming more severe, people have been looking for a
way to try and remedy some of the damage done by recognizing the importance of trees and how
they can clean our air. This past September, Amy Chillag of CNN responded to this call to action
by writing her article, “US cities are losing 36 million trees a year. Here’s why it matters and
how you can stop it.” As a producer and reporter for CNN she uses technology to cover stories
for the digital audience. Using this job to her advantage she informs her audience about the
affects tree loss has on our planet, how it adds to global warming, and what you can do to help
the cause.
The author starts by giving the facts of the impact tree loss has had on urban areas and
why it affects you. Then continues by giving 10 benefits trees can provide to your community
and residency. Some of these include air pollution reduction, energy emissions reduction, water
quality improvement, flooding reduction, protection from UV rays and improved human health.
After she explains why you should plan for the layout of the trees before you plant them using
quotes and sources to back her. It’s so important to have a plan for trees in your area because if
you don’t do it correctly it could do more harm than good, like taking an old tree out and
planting a new one could throw off the whole ecosystem on your block. Wildlife have used this
tree as it’s home and the ground around trees are even effected through it roots and watering
system. If you have a layout and an intentional design for where trees should be planted you will
have a balance between the human world and the benefits of nature. Lastly she give all the ways
you could help prevent tree loss to better your community and planet. Chillag relies heavily on
the mix between ethos and logos to effectively persuade readers of her claim that the more trees
that are carefully planted will lead to a healthier environment and reduce global warming.
Throughout the whole article Cillag uses logos by giving multiple facts and studies
focused on the issue and uses them to reinstate her claims. In her second paragraph she states, “A
study published last year by the US Forest Service found that we lost 36 million trees annually
from urban and rural communities over a five-year period” (Chillag). She uses this fact to
convince the readers that there is a real issue here and that there was research done by a credible
foundation to prove how big the problem is. Her claim is now more believable because of the
Another example of logos is later on in the article when she gives the 10 benefits more
trees can have, namely the improved human health, she gives multiple facts and studies
supporting her. “Many studies have found connections between exposure to nature and better
mental and physical health. Some hospitals have added tree views and plantings for patients as a
result of these studies. Doctors are even prescribing walks in nature for children and families due
to evidence that nature exposure lowers blood pressure and stress hormones. And studies have
associated living near green areas with lower death rates” (Chillag). While she gives facts for
every 10 of the reasons, this one provides not one but three different links to studies that agree
with the arguments she provides for why trees contribute to human health. Since she has so many
sources, you can trust these facts and accept them as reliable evidence to why you should be
persuaded.
Now while Chillag provides many different studies and sources to back her she focuses
on one scientist and study in particular. David Nowak, a senior US Forest Service scientist and
co-author of a study the US Forest Service did to discover the effects on tree loss. She uses his
quotes all throughout her article. She applies ethos here and utilizes Nowak’s credibility to
persuade the audience that tree loss does affect them and why they should do something about it.
She uses a quote from him at the beginning that reads, “If we continue on this path [of cutting
down 36 million tress annually], cities will become warmer, more polluted, and generally more
unhealthy for inhabitants” (Chillag). Usage of this quote helps the reader realize that their health
is at stake if we continue to completely wipe out trees from the face of our planet. You can trust
this man’s word because of his research behind the issue. Applying that trust she can prove to the
reader that the mass decrement of our trees will harm us humans and damage our help, which is
Additionally she also applies Nowak in one of the 10 benefits given from more trees,
energy emissions reduction. “Trees reduce energy costs by $4 billion a year, according to
Nowak's study. The shading of those trees on buildings reduce your air conditioning costs. Take
those trees away; now your buildings are heating up, you're running your air conditioning more,
and you're burning more fuel from the power plants, so the pollution and emissions go up"
(Chillag). Without Nowak’s research and knowledge she wouldn’t have been able to make the
claim that energy emissions reduce when there are more trees in the area. Her claim isn’t
believable without the quote from Nowak following it. He elaborates more and is able to explain
that claim better because he was the one that did research behind it, he knows what he’s talking
about. Without his support from the quote it would be scarcely credible claim.
However, a journalist from BBC News, Matt McGrath, wrote an article titled “‘Wrong
Types of Trees’ in Europe Increased Global Warming,” which explained that although we need
more trees, we need to be smart about it and make sure we are putting the right plants in the right
places. The author also argues that even removing some trees in an organized manner will
release more carbon that otherwise would be trapped within the forests. Also, the shift that
Europe tried to do with the trees actually harmed the environment way more than what was
happening before. He quotes a scientist from the Science in Action on the BBC World Service
saying, “Due to the shift to conifer species, there was a warming over Europe of almost 0.12
degrees and that is caused because the conifers are darker and absorb more solar radiation.”
These trees absorb more radiation which released more carbon dioxide which causes the whole
Greenhouse effect. He uses logos to prove that while articles like this are good and that trees are
a good thing, we need to look at the bigger picture to see what is really going to help the
situation. Whether that’s removing trees or planting them, each action does have a consequence
environmental status and those who don’t believe it’s an issue. I am a part of the audience
because I’m worried about our environment so I want to learn more about the issues and what I
can do to help. However I would show this to someone who didn’t believe in global warming or
didn’t think trees were dying because she uses good ethos and logos that effectively persuades
readers that this is an issue and why it would be so much better if we planted more trees. It was
also smart of her to give some ideas of what you can do to help at the end because once someone
is persuaded to that same side of thinking they’ll want to do something about it, act on their
newfound knowledge. All in all she did a good job being a persuasive writer and bringing to light
the problems we face because we continue to cut down millions of trees. Having credible sources
and informed professionals to sustain her arguments she’s able to appeal to her audience and
1379 words
Reference Page
Chillag, A. (2019, September 18). US cities are losing 36 million trees a year. Here's why it
https://www.cnn.com/2019/07/20/health/iyw-cities-losing-36-million-trees-how-to-help-t
rnd/index.html.
CNN Profiles - Amy Chillag - Producer, CNN Special Projects. (2016, January 13). Retrieved
from https://www.cnn.com/profiles/amy-chillag#about.
McGrath, Matt. “'Wrong Type of Trees' in Europe Increased Global Warming.” BBC News,
BBC,