Analyzing Purpose

In the post below I have thought about what I plan on adding to the current debate on geoengineering and how my audience might react to it.

Leeson, Evan. "unfolding". May 18, 2009 via flickr.
Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 2.0 Generic License

Goal of public argument: What do you want your readers to do, feel, think, believe, etc. as a result of reading it?

• After watching the video I create, I want my viewers to feel motivated to take a stand against geoengineering. Current publishings on the issue do a poor job at connecting to the public. My goal is to make the information presented more relatable to all viewers. By the end of it they should be angered by the fact that this is the way some scientists are trying to "help" combat climate change. These methods do not address the root of the problem and only tries to cover it up.

Plausible Actions/Reactions:

• The audience begins to take a stand against geoengineering
• The audience is more motivated to help combat climate change
• The audience researches more on their own
• The audience is angered by the issue

Not Plausible:

• Geoengineering is abolished due to public outrage
• Scientists reconsider utilizing aerosol injecting
• Everyone goes against geoengineering

Cause/Effect Tracing:

• Cause: Audience researches more individually
• Effect: Searches for better ways to deal with climate change
• Effect: Create rallies/groups that are against geoengineering
• Effect: Develop a better way to deal with climate change

Advancing My Cause:

• The groups of people who are heavily involved in climate activism are the most likely to advance my cause. These people are actively looking for publishings on how to deal with climate change in a positive manner. By studying my issue and why it should be stopped, they are the ones that will take action. They are the ones who will go out and protest geoengineering. They, with the established voices in the public, will inform others of the problems behind geoengineering.