Analyzing My Genre

BuzzFeed, "Buzzfeed Logo" 03/30/12 via Wikipedia Commons,  Public Domain

This post will explain the genre I intend to use forma public argument. Overall I plan on it being a list-article like the ones that I usually only see on buzzfeed, so all of my examples are from that site.

Example 1
Example 2
Example 3
Example 4
Example 5

Social Context:

• The genre is typically set on buzzfeed, as explained, but may be seen on any popular entertainment source online, that doesn't have much factuality or credibility. Practically anyone could write a buzzfeed article.
• There is not usually one subject of the genre, it ranges from serious topics to "12 emojis your mom would send", but most of the articles are lists, that give numbered points adding to the overall purpose.
• The genre is open to the general public, so it could potentially be used by anyone, but would most likely be used humorously, or to make an argument/describe an event through use of little words, i..e. the Rob Lowe example, so in any way that is not to be taken as the most credible source.
• The purpose of this genre is generally to be a source of relatable entertainment, or a time passer. However, at times Buzzfeed posts articles like "5 reasons you need _____ in your life", in which it will make a less factual, more opinionated argument in a very simplistic way. 

Rhetorical Patterns of the Genre:

• Facts, statistics, and other in-depth evidence are very rarely found in Buzzfeed list articles. This type of content, or wordy quotes, are content unlikely to be included. There are usually hyperlinks that link to more evidence, however.
• The most common rhetorical appeal in this genre is the appeal to pathos. Appealing to emotion helps the author connect with the audience and seem more relatable, thus increasing the power of the argument. Especially on a less factual source like buzzfeed, people are expecting that kind of emotion.
• The organization in this genre mostly just includes a title, subtitles in list (but conversational) form, a related picture, and then a brief explanation. These vary from example to example, but this is the general outline.
• The sentences mostly share a simple, casual style. Again, to create that relatability, a casual tone, as if the author is simply having a conversation with friends, is employed. The sentences also are usually brief and lack depth.
• In terms of word choice, this genre keeps it pretty simple, and in a way dumbed-down. Using words that appeal to a younger, more hip generation are often employed such as acronyms like "idgaf" and "lol".

What the Patterns Reveal:

• This genre doesn't really exclude anyone. The only exception might be its lack of appeal to an actual scholar, or someone looking for real, in depth and ground-breaking information on a subject.
• The genre encourages a casual conversation about the topic or argument between its author and audience. Since it is usually so based on opinions, it is up for an open debate and often debated in the comments.
• It is assumed that most of the audience for this genre is going to be younger, more entertainment-enfatuated people. This group tends to sway democratic on social issues, politically speaking, which can change how certain arguments are perceived.
• The two most valuable types of content in this genre are pictures and outside references, such as hyperlinks. The least valuable for this genre is long explanations, or much evidence at all.

Reflection: After reading about Scott and Lauren's genres, I realize mine is way more simplistic. In both of their genres, it is easy to make an argument, including a great deal of evidence and opinionated explanation throughout. In my genre, however, There is usually an emphasis on brevity, so there is not much room to actually MAKE an argument. I'm not sure how this will effect my overall draft, but I will try to find a way to incorporate all of the pieces of my genre with making a public argument.