You are on page 1of 3

Zane Dennison

English 1010
09/28/2015
Bangerter Sensei

Rhetorical Analysis #6
Intro & Summary
On of the most intriguing methods to control the opinions of the masses, is
through censorship. Censorship allows you to control and monitor the information the
public receives. For this reason it is an extremely useful tool for keeping and gaining
power. After the invention of the printing press made literacy a useful method of
receiving/sending information; people have attempted to influence others using this
medium. The article I chose is titled 5 Insane Examples of Censorship Backfiring
Hilariously and it explores the unexpected outcomes of this censorship. The article is
written with sarcasm and humor to convey the ridiculousness of the attempts at
censorship.
The article explains several examples of censorship, starting with how Germany
has censored video games in order to minimize the players exposure to violence and
gore. The second example the author gives was of Japan censoring a different video game
by replacing a torture sequence with a tickle sequence. The third example the author
examines involves the World Championship Wrestling league issuing a company wide
mandate that the word foreign had negative connotations and should no longer be used
network wide, opting instead for international. The third example of censorship was
regarding the alternate ending filmed by the Chinese government for 2013s 21 & Over

movie. The final example is of a TV adaption of the film Show Girls in which they
censored the nudity by creating poorly animated CGI clothing.

Rhetorical Analysis

The author appears to acknowledge that censorship has numerous positive


applications, but is routinely abused or misused hilariously. He doesnt clarify whether he
comes away from his research believing that censorship is overall negative or positive,
but does seem to enjoy examining the rhetorical reasoning behind the censorship itself.
He also pokes fun at the ridiculousness of the censors accomplishing the exact opposite
of whats intended by utilizing a humorous and light hearted writing style.
His audience is primarily college students and other young adults, which he seems
to understand well. He uses language that is more appropriate for a younger demographic
and often refers to subjects older generations may not understand or have an appreciation
for. Because he writes for a humor website, he included numerous jokes and instances of
sarcasm to make the article more attractive to his young audience. He also used images,
not only as embellishment, but as additions to the content of the text. He often pauses a
thought before an image and completes the thought after the image which helps illustrate
his point to the reader.
The author explains his perceived irony that in the majority of the cases he
researched the censorship actually caused more problems than it solved. He seems to feel
that it is futile to attempt to censor things that arent a direct threat to public safety and
the article is basically him backing this opinion up with facts. A great example of this was

the WWE censoring Foreign by replacing it with International. The author explains
how this backfired by making the objects appear to be foreign in the sense of culture
instead of foreign to the ring itself; which is exactly what the WWE was intending to
avoid.
Overall the writer effectively states the information in a way that is easy to
read even while casually browsing the internet. He is also fairly entertaining with his
delivery; his writing voice is witty and a bit cynical. This matches well with his intended
audience, since college humor is notoriously crude and sarcastic. He also does a great job
of not isolating his audience by attaching himself to a certain opinion about the topic. He
simply presents the facts in a humorous, easy going way. I enjoyed reading this article
and will read more of them in the future.