Cyber Warfare: A Genre Analysis of a Cartoon and a You-tube Video
Gregorio Simmons
University of Texas at El Paso
Introduction
Cyber Warfare was once a virtual threat to anyone and everyone who used a device to connect to the internet for whatever their purpose was for being on the internet. A user of these devices does not necessarily need to be connected to the internet, they merely just need to be connected to a network in which another user or device is using the internet. Whether a person is just trying to check their e-mail or they happen to click on a bad link, may result in a series of events that are damaging to the user, device or anyone on that network. Cyber Warfare is somewhat limited on the genres in which most advocates choose to display their concerns; this analysis compares a Cartoon and a You-Tube Video to analyze who the audience is, the purpose of each genre, rhetorical issues prevalent within both genres, the structure in which each have been created and the style and languages used.
Purpose/Audience
The purpose of the cartoon was to spread awareness of what the artist portrays the future to be for the security of our national security. Technology is growing exponentially in the uses of society. The drawing depicts that the United States needs to develop a way to secure our technology because if used against us it will damage our infrastructure as a whole. The cartoon is addressed to the general public of internet users as well as even politicians that need to be aware of future threats to our country by means of cyber warfare. The cartoon is only located online which is suitable for the audience because of the whole concept is based on technology.
The You-Tube Video again uses technology to appeal to its audience. The genre of videos through the internet is a big part in today’s media. Although in the video David Sanger is actually giving a speech at a Library on a new book, the author also felt the video would get more exploitation through the use of our growing media technologies. The purpose of the video is to give some insight on how the Bush Administration towards the end of their term thought it necessary to create a defense plan before the United States is attacked by means of Cyber Warfare. Also David Sanger also touched on how “Congress allocated $16 Billion Dollars to go look at those cyber defenses and cyber-attacks” (David Sanger, 2009).
Both genres used technology as a fitting basis platform for their topics. Although the video is only 2 minutes and 50 seconds long the audience can get more information and is better aware of the Cyber Warfare threat. The cartoon is only a single picture but has the ability to let the audience draw their own conclusions to the situation. The cartoon states a question and response theme where the question offers the audience to think more in depth of the situation as compared to the video; gives more information and does not let the audience create their own conclusions.
Rhetorical Issues (Ethos, Pathos, Logos)
There are rhetorical issues; Ethos, Pathos, and Logos, within both of these genres. The Ethos of the video does explain that the speaker David Sanger is the Chief Washington Correspondent for The New York Times. This informs the audience that he is very accredited and has insight of the topic. Also helping accredit the David was the way he was dressed, very formally which helps appeal to the audience. The speaker in the video did not use Pathos, although he did not try to cause widespread panic, David Sanger used Logos to get his message across. The way Logos was used was by informing the audience of how our government is using resources such as funding to do with a real threat. Also David Sanger used examples to help his audience understand the real situation by giving an example of how the military used Cyber Warfare during the conflicts in the Middle East.
The cartoons rhetorical issues differ from the video in how the artist was able to get the message across. Although the artist is not widely known throughout the world his works can be found on many websites referring to politics to support his credibility. Pathos was used to draw the emotion of humor to the audience. The audience has to be informed of the subject of cyber warfare to understand the irony of how the general public thinks of defense to show who has to be in the frontlines of cyber warfare differs between real combat. The logos blend in with the Pathos in a way because of how the differences of how the two types of battles are fought. Instead of having an armed soldier with technology, instead the types of soldiers in cyber warfare are the technology inclined computer users.
These two genres differ in rhetorical issues because of how they approach their audiences. It is the way in which each author/artist portrays an issue and expresses their concerns which make each genre unique. The speaker uses Ethos and Logos to appeal to his audience. The artist however, uses a simple drawing and uses Pathos and Logos to appeal to the audience. Both genres are very effective in how they approach their audiences because they both used technology, which also is a part of the Cyber Warfare threat. Both genres however used their talents in different ways to get their point of view across to the audience.
Structure
The structure of the comic is how the artist decides to make his point of view come across to the audience. On the far left you have a text box labeled “Q: What will the warrior-guardian of the future look like?” (“Cartoon” Illustrated by KAL, 2009). The artist then illustrates a soldier with sunglasses carrying a weapon with a rocket on the top, dressed as if he is going to war with future technology as his weapon system. Further behind him you see a small framed male on a computer waving his hand. With a laptop on his lap, and he is kicking back in a chair with his feet on a desk labeled “Cyber Security” (“Cartoon” Illustrated by KAL, 2009). The small framed male saying “Yo! Dude…back here” (“Cartoon” Illustrated by KAL, 2009). The artist left his drawing in black and white with no color in his drawing.
The video was setup in a library for a book review. The speaker was dressed in formal attire. The video is approximately 2 minutes and 50 seconds long. The video is long enough for the speaker who is David Sanger, to get his message across and explain it to his audience so they can fully understand what he is trying to get across. The speech has enough material to keep the audience entertained while at the same time is presenting the audience with a knowledge of how our government has been and planning on handling the situation on Cyber Warfare.
These two genres vary greatly in their nature and in their purpose. Therefore there is a wide variety in how each genre was constructed. Since the cartoon is meant for a humorous effect on the audience it only one drawing. Since the speech is delivered to a different audience there is a difference in how it was constructed. Instead of being humorous the speaker dresses formally because he is formally speaking on the topic.
Style/Language
The video is of David Sanger speaking on his views of Cyber Warfare. David Sanger is the White House Correspondent from the New York Times. Because of his accreditations already he uses formal language. The style in which he delivered his speech was as a general public speech. The speaker decided to use formal language presented in a light hearted tone. The topic of Cyber Warfare is a serious threat and David is very knowledgeable about the topic. To ensure his audience understands his message he uses examples and follows his remarks with common phrases to keep the audience entertained and allows them to follow along.
The artist for the cartoon has a very different approach and very different use of language to appeal to the humor of his drawing. The quote that the cyber security worker in the background is not formal, instead the artist portrays to his audience that the worker or “future warrior-guardian” is very laid back and uses the relaxed language of those young adults in today’s society. The artist uses that language in a way to almost mock the soldier standing in front of him. Who remains speechless and has a very professional appearance as a soldier.
Conclusion/Synthesis
These two very different genres have two very different approaches and it is necessary for them to use different styles and languages. The speaker wants to be informative, so he speaks in a very formal yet light hearted tone to ensure the audience understands him. The artist depicts that the audience already has some knowledge on the subject and so he uses a laid back style and language for the effect of humor.
Since both genres have separate goals in which they want to do, they must approach their audience in a manner which applies. If the artist wanted to create a humorous cartoon it would not appeal to the audience if he used formal language. As it would not appeal to the audience of the speaker if he was during his speech, behind a desk, feet kicked up with a hat on backwards. In conclusion, whether an artist, speaker, writer. The creator of any genre of material must make themselves aware of which of these aspects; purpose, structure, style and language, they want to use to effectively engage their audience through means of rhetoric.
Work Cited
http://www.google.com/imgresimgurl=http://risingpowers.foreignpolicyblogs.com/ (“Cartoon” Illustrated by KAL, 2009)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=38Xgpl8X-s0 (Added by ForaTV) (Speaker:David Sanger,The White House Correspondent, The New York Times)
