Grief In The Age Of Facebook Summary

Regardless of what the authors think of Facebook in their articles “Grief in the Age of Facebook” and “The Facebook Addiction Spreads,” Angela Adair Fowler was good in her purpose and the overall argument, yet she did not use strong evidences. Whereas, Elizabeth Stone was great in her main ideas and evidences making her article to be a better rhetorical writing, yet her purpose is the only weak point. Honestly, both articles are well done and leave a special feeling to their writings that talk about the impact of Facebook on its users. Stone mainly focuses on the “memorializing” policy of Facebook, a bright side; while Fowler describes Facebook as a pestilence. Fowler’s article is about Facebook heavily use being quickly spread among people

Fowler begins her article with a little more direct or sharp language usage by including fatal word such as when she described Facebook by using the words “pestilence” and “disease,” which shows her audience who are the student and faculty members of Mississippi State University that she is totally against that and want others to rethink that issue or look at it from a different angle; as well as mentioning the word “you” in the her introduction paragraph multiple times as it seems like she is speaking and pointing at the reader’s face. That way of starting might either freaks out the readers and ends up them stop reading the article or would strongly pulls the reader’s attention and urge them to go all over this article (93). As it is obviously noticed that her purpose is to persuade, she clearly shows that when approaching to the conclusion paragraph by saying “we must use moderation so we will not end up joining the group ‘Facebook Made Me Fail My Exam!’” (95). Also, referring the same evidence has just been mentioned, it appears Fowler’s high love to make a change when she specifically said “we must…” which leads the readers to feel that she is saying these words from straight from the heart. Fowler’s organization of this article is fluctuating between refusing the concept of Facebook at the beginning and accepting but with limits at the middle towards the last part of the article. In

First of all, unlike Fowler, Stone is a professor of English, communications, and media studies so she is more critical source and trustworthy although she is writing to a similar audience, her college’s students and faculties. From the starting point of the article where it says “On July 17 last year, one of my most…” it illustrates that the writing style is narrative, which is about the death of one of her students (292). Plus, the organization is pretty smooth with a clear opinion from the beginning unlike the ups and downs in Fowler’s article. Additionally, according to Stone’s article where she says “It was against the natural order For Casey to die at 21…” and “I wonder - I’m not sure, but I wonder – if I should have known better” she is kind of giving her audience clues that the purpose of this article is to express feelings (294). In contrast, it can be argued that the purpose is not to express feelings but to inform referring to the point form where she started to talk about the Facebook policy saying “As it turn out, Facebook has a “memorializing” policy in regard to the pages of those who have died” (293). Also, by using the same evidence of the first clam “I wonder - I’m not sure, but I wonder – if I should have known better” which indicates that she may want to point out to inform her audience about a benefit of this policy that it made her know