| Genre | Time Focus | Setting | Purpose | Key Question |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Deliberative | Future | Legislature, policy debate, public forum | Persuade audience to take action or adopt a policy | What should we do? |
| Forensic | Past | Courts, investigative journalism, fact-checking | Establish guilt/innocence or truth/falsehood about past events | What happened? |
| Epideictic | Present | Ceremonies, eulogies, tributes, award speeches | Praise or blame; reinforce shared community values | What do we stand for? |
| Element | What to Analyze | Rhetorical Questions |
|---|---|---|
| Composition | Layout, framing, focus, foreground/background, rule of thirds, symmetry vs. asymmetry | What does the arrangement emphasize? What is cropped out? |
| Audience | Who is depicted, who is addressed, cultural symbols and references included | Who is this image speaking to? Who is excluded? |
| Purpose | Inform, persuade, sell, document, commemorate, provoke | What is this image trying to make the viewer feel or do? |
| Persuasion | Appeals used — pathos (emotion), ethos (credibility), logos (data visualization) | How does the image create its persuasive effect? |
| Technique | How It Works | Example |
|---|---|---|
| Word Choice / Labeling | Using loaded terms that carry positive or negative connotations for the same referent | "Undocumented immigrant" vs. "illegal alien" |
| Source Selection | Whose voices are quoted shapes whose perspective seems authoritative or credible | Quoting only industry experts in an environmental story |
| Story Placement | Front-page vs. buried-inside placement signals relative importance | A police shooting covered on page A1 vs. A14 |
| Omission | What the story leaves out shapes the reader's understanding as much as what is included | Reporting crime statistics without demographic context |
| Contextualization | How background information is provided (or withheld) shapes interpretation of events | Connecting a protest to "outside agitators" vs. local grievances |
| Headline Framing | Headlines compress and often distort nuanced stories; readers often read only headlines | "Scientists Disagree on Climate" (implying false equivalence) |
1. Identify the Exigence
Ask: What specific situation, problem, or event prompted this text? Why was this the moment to speak or publish?
2. Locate the Implicit Claim
Public texts often argue without stating a thesis. Ask: What does this text want me to believe, feel, or do?
3. Identify the Rhetorical Genre
Is this deliberative (future action), forensic (past events), or epideictic (shared values)? Genre shapes what counts as evidence.
4. Analyze the Frame
What has been selected, emphasized, or excluded? Whose perspective does the frame center, and who is marginalized?
5. Evaluate the Evidence Standards
Does the text treat expert consensus and opinion as equivalent? Does it cite data selectively? Evaluate the quality of evidence, not just its presence.
6. Consider Kairos
Why now? How does the timing of the text affect its rhetorical impact? What would change if it appeared earlier or later?
Treating All News as Equally Biased
Framing exists in all journalism, but that does not mean all sources are equally unreliable. AP questions reward students who can identify specific rhetorical choices, not those who simply label a source "biased."
Confusing Scientific Consensus with Opinion
A synthesis or argument question may include sources that misrepresent scientific consensus. Students must distinguish what experts broadly agree on from what remains genuinely contested — and treat them differently as evidence.
Missing the Implicit Argument in Visual Sources
Photographs, infographics, and advertisements in synthesis prompts make arguments. Describing what an image "shows" is insufficient — you must analyze what it argues and how its visual choices produce that argument.
Ignoring Kairos in Rhetorical Analysis
A strong rhetorical analysis accounts for context and timing. If a passage was written during a specific political moment, crisis, or cultural shift, that context shapes purpose and audience — ignoring it weakens your analysis.