“Rough Justice,” V. “New York Times,” The article “Rough Justice” by Alejandro Reyes and the New York Times editorial “Time to assert American values” analyzes the debate about Michael Fay’s caning case. Michael Fay, a teenager living in Singapore, received a canning for vandalism. The author of the editorial believes this punishment is too harsh, while Reyes believes America has no right to impose its values on another country. In the editorial, the author is more persuasive while in “Rough Justice” there are more rhetorical appeals. In the editorial, the author used rhetorical devices to persuade the audience. In the New York Times editorial, the author uses a persuasive call to action to skillfully persuade the audience that Fay's caning was not justified. “When Americans express outrage over a punishment that causes permanent scarring…” The writer of the editorial is expressing how cruel they believe the punishment is. The writer skillfully employs a pathos rhetorical appeal which helps to persuade the audience that caning as a punishment for crime isn’t justified and shouldn’t be happening. The author also uses vivid descriptions of the punishment to show how harsh it is. …show more content…
“A case like Michael Fay’s is important because it provides a chance to challenge an inhumane practice that ought to not exist anymore.” The writer describes Singapore's practice of caning as inhumane and believes it should not be happening anywhere. The writer is skillfully using pathos and logos rhetorical appeal to convince the audience of their opinion on the