T.A.

I thought I'd analyze an interesting source I found that talks about video games causing seizures in children. I've been thinking about writing about this for my paper.

1. The argument is that children may experience seizures as a result of playing video games.

2. It seems that the target audience would be parents of kids who play video games.

3. The argument relies heavily on logos: lots of statistics about this issue are used. Photosensitive epilepsy is described in detail, and they talk about the fact that it is much more common in children than in adults. Other statistics are given about the amounts of people who have experienced these seizures. 618 children in Japan experienced this problem from a single TV show one year. Their argument makes perfect sense in that regard. Pathos is inevitable since the argument is about children and is directed toward parents. No one wants their child to suffer from anything, including epilepsy. Ethos is effective as well, because the research was done by a department that specifcially studies seizures. They obviously know what they are talking about. I think their argument is mostly sufficient, but probably a few quotes from pediatricians would have been effective. The more offical sources you can have the better. It was a very typical argument, in the fact that all of their methods were perfectly predictable. They didn't try to shock their readers too much; they simply told everything how it was. All of their information was accurate, which is good. And everything mentioned completely relevant. The article was very concise, which is perfect for their audience. Short and sweet and to the point.

4. I thought this argument was extremely effective, which was the scary part. The numbers of people who suffer from this are shocking. I never thought about the idea that video games could cause medical problems.