Eric Liu's writing, Remember When Public Spaces Didn't Carry Brand, Names?

,
published on March 25 1999 in the USA Today, is effective in pointing out that as the
future comes, our public spaces and the atmosphere of our communities will be
over whelmed in the language that we blindly allow to take over, mainly brand
names and advertisements. Eric Liu was Born in Poughkeepsie NY 1968, and
graduate college of Yale College and Harvard school of law. He is well known for his
success as an author of many national best seller books, a speechwriter for our
formal president Bill Clinton, and founder and CEO of the Citizen University. He is
now a regular columnist for CNN.com, speaks regularly across the country, and
teaches civic leadership at Washington University in Seattle where he currently
lives.
Eric Liu discusses, in 1999 as the World Champion Yankees prepared for their open
home season game, some lucky corporation may buy the naming rights of the
Yankee Stadium by the time their 2000 season arrives. Although, there was little
protest toward the highest bidder renaming the treasured and cherished seventy-six
year old stadium, Eric Liu and many others felt more than just their stomachs turn
as they felt the forceful strike of these big brand names consume our public spaces.
Advertisements of brand names are sweeping the nations public space, everywhere
it is seen, in Central Park with advertisements of banners, to San Francisco fable
park now called 3 COM Park. The conspicuous logos of corporations sweep
throughout the nation from products plastered onto bus transportation to Dr. Pepper
buying add space on school roofs. However it is not just the US in this rampant of
advertisements, we see England with big corporation brand names filling up space
next to the white cliffs of Dover such as Adidas. Eric Liu proceeds that the point is
America is commercialized, for some it is not a big problem but the nation is

allowing the large corporations to take over our publics spaces and communities,
where the people, as Eric Liu discusses, live every day. Public spaces are the
emblems, the physical embodiments, of a community's spirit and soul. The people
do not need market valuations to depend on, public spaces matter. Eric Liu writes
we are literally and figuratively no-names. With the brand names all around us have
no identity. They become our identity. Now we do draw the line somewhere, like the
time in 1996 where Taco Bell supposedly purchased the Liberty Bell and renamed
it the Taco Liberty Bell as a April Fools joke. People were offended and reacted to
protest in feeling that they ('brand companies) had crossed the line. But where will
it end. Does it take the disappearances of our public spaces, or the renaming of a
legendary stadium, to make us take a look at our branded culture and will we
actually stop before they brand a national treasure?, Eric Liu concludes.
Eric Liu's essay is effective by sharing his point of view by use of pathos and ethos
appeal. However it is weak in logos appeal. Throughout the essay, Eric Liu shows
appeals of pathos when he explains how up setting he felt when the Yankees
stadium may sell the Naming rights to the highest bidder of the big
corporations. He uses language of emotion when he explains how public spaces do
matter, such as the physical embodiments, of a community's spirit and soul. or
its very purpose is to preserve a realm where a person's worth or dignity doesn't
depend on market valuations. As said by Eric Liu, to some people reading his essay
they may look at him to be old fashioned but, he shows deep concern that publics
spaces are important to the peoples everyday lives throughout their
communities. He gives writings pathos when he writes about the 76 year old
Yankee stadium where Ruth built treasured memories of the New Yorkers including
memories of Joe DiMaggio. He lists the two popular well known parks both at

opposite sides of the nation from one another, how Central Park carries banners of
big corporations and San Francisco's fabled candlestick park has been renamed to 3
Com Park. Eric Liu writes the importance that while the nation allows theses large
markets to sweep our public spaces we under-mind ourselves the importance that
we are all equal citizens but we are unequal consumers. We are lost with identity,
America is commercialized. Eric Liu shows pathos appeals throughout his essay with
word choices of emotions and example of treasured memories of history to the
community like the Park in San Francisco and the 76 year old Yankee Stadium.
Eric Liu's is quite a smart man, very intelligent with the use of language of emotion
and background knowledge in writing as well as speech speaking. Expected much
from a speech writer to the formal president Bill Clinton and a national best sellers
author. Eric Liu uses a style of writing that shows powerful examples to describe
that public spaces do matter, that America is in fact commercialized, and how blind
we are to allow it to overwhelm our spaces. For example his style in writing is
shared such as, the fact that our forms of identity have been converted to brand
identity, what we share in society social commons are commenced. We forget that
there are other means, besides badges of corporate affiliation, to communicate with
one another. Eric Liu shares examples that as live out and about we see
advertisements on bus transportation in how he says it, rolling Billboards and
districts like Texas have been lured into allowing big corporations to fill in among our
atmosphere. By paying Texas district 3.45 million dollars to paint Dr. Pepper on a
high school roof building so that people flying in and out of Dallas may attract
passengers. Eric Liu also includes facts that dont take a genius to figure out that
this is not just happening in America where we can clearly see all around. In

England, where Liu implies both pathos and ethos appeals of the legendary white
cliffs of Dover now serving as the backdrop for a laser-projected Adidas ad.
Eric Liu's article lack tremendously in logos, he never shares the advantages of how
money paid by the Brand Companies help wing communities that are paid to. Or
how better American is versioned if there was never a public space problem. While
he has his facts about the common knowledge we all see, we do in fact see the bus
transportation and districts throughout the States being filled up with big
corporations like Pepsi, Dr. Pepper, AT&T, and Adidas, mentioned in the essay. Or
that facts of common knowledge that the Yankee stadium may sell out to the
highest bidder by the 2000 season and how much Texas district were paid for Dallas
to be commercialized on a high school roof top. There is a questionable logic that
these corporations are only pointed out to be looked upon as a bad idea, Eric Liu
only focuses on the negative appeal of Brand advertisements filling up our public
spaces. Has anyone wondered what 3. 45 million dollars could have done to help
the community of that Texas School District, by simply allowing them to occupy the
unused space of an ordinary schoolhouse?
Eric Liu lacks in defending how better off America would look if we did not have the
problem of advertisements filling our public spaces, beside the treasured memories
of beloved Stadiums and Parks. Would independent local business buy up these add
spaces, if it weren't for these big corporations brands advertising in our public
spaces? Would local business and our communities be better off without that extra
income? Corporations may fill up our public spaces, but how do we know that they
are not offering a public services as well? Do billboards on buses or soda pop
advertisements on schools not help their community financially? I understand that
with large corporations forcing their brands on us with billboards, signs, and ad

posters might take some of the natural beauty away from our public spaces. But
what about what we gain in return? What about large corporations like Walmart, do
they not employ millions of employees, or Pepsi products. Do they not create
thousands of stable jobs for Americans; is that not a public service?
The writer is effective in pointing out that as the future comings our public spaces
and the atmosphere of our communities will be over whelmed in the language that
we blindly allow to take over and the brand names and the advertisements will
come along with it. By using appeals of pathos and ethos, being well organized,
having a good flow and uses strong language to help sell his main point, I feel that
he will persuade many readers. But Eric Liu however lacks in logos, lacking in facts
of how well off American may be or, what would happen if there were no big
corporations filling up our publics spaces, this leads to the inevitable situation
where readers may find Eric Liu's essay ineffective and can lead to disagreement in
his point of view.

Name one significant concept or idea that you have learned about in this
second unit. Why is this significant to you? Name one concept which did not
make sense and/or did not seem as significant to you as it did to the
instructors/tutors/authors. How do you make sense of these differences?
Pointing out the weakness in a reading that I write about can really create
a strong rhetorical analysis by including disadvantages the left out by the
writer. Because in a rhetorical analysis it is said to write a paragraph
about how effective the writer is in his essay, especially when a writer is
passionate about a certain problem or cause, it is important for the writer
to cover the advantages of the opposite beliefs of his subject matter. For
example, Eric Liu that I wrote about his article that appeared in the
1999 USA Today, Remember When Public Spaces Didn't Carry Brand
Names? Eric Liu explains in his writing how brand name companies are
overwhelming our public spaces and for treasured memories like the
Yankee Stadium, they decided to sell out the naming rights to the highest
bidder. He explains with strong use of pathos and ethos to make his point
matter highly strong but, lacks in defending his point to include the
advantages of what these brand name companies make contribute to the
community. Therefore, by writing how effective and in effective his essay
his, my rhetorical essay can become a strong first draft and revision.
2. Has your view of writing changed because of the materials or your
experiences in the course? If so how? What implications do these changes
have on how you view your own writing? If there have not been changes, how
do your views of writing agree or disagree with those being promoted in the
textbook and course?
They have indefinite change my writing, specifically in rhetorical essay, I
found out how important the introduction of the essay needs to be
engaging while including the writer name and essay by beginning with
how effective his essay is. Also how easy the summary can be summarized
by simply reading a paragraph of the authors essay and creating a

sentence of each. Or when writing about how the writer used pathos and
ethos, it is important that I showed examples of his use in the appeals and
not lose focus in explaining it. And stick by how does the impact of the
ethos appeal effect the audience and explain why. And towards the essay
conclusion I was able to learn and maintain a effective conclusion by still
giving credits about the authors essay but politely ho also ineffective his
essay is.
3. Reflect on your current revisions on your Rhetorical Analysis. What is going
well? What is causing you problems? How do you see revision on this essay
as different from the Narrative essay? Specifically what role do you see
critical reading (rhetorical) playing in your analysis and revisions? What new
strategies for revision have you or could you employ to help?
What is going well in my rhetorical analysis essay is that my organization
is there. My summary is clear and strong as well as, the paragraph in the
lack of defense that shows how ineffective the author's essay I wrote
about is. My conclusion is also clear and strong but, I had trouble with the
paragraph in how Eric Liu's writing by using pathos and ethos by losing
focus, or like usually I have a hard time trying to write what I am wanting
to explain to where my examples and sentences intertwined and become
unclear. Or by showing how does the use of ethos impact the audience. I
did my best but all of my essay those two were the most struggling as well
as grammar corrections.
4. What have you done to fulfill the participation points (10%) for the course?
(e.g. comments on announcements, responding to questions from peers or
teachers online, researching writing concepts you are struggling with,
attending or participating in events connected to writing etc). What is your
plan for meeting this requirement in the next unit?
I seek out peer assistance in reading my draft and helping with grammar
errors.
I also attended writing tutors in which I met with Brittany and she helped
me clear up somethings with my first draft. Although I agreed with
Brittany that my first draft was fairly strong I seek the advice given by
Ron and by getting another reader's response in revising draft...he help
me by showing his comments and thoughts in which pointed out more
things I could work on for my revision. For my next writing I would like to
for on reading more examples of a first draft of the next writing
assignment, attend more writing tutor meetings, and participate more in
peer responses.