Biden is Right Vaccine

Name

Professor’s name

Course

Date

Article Title: Biden is Right: Vaccine Refusal ‘Has Cost All of Us’

Introduction

Authored by Kristian Thacker for the New York Times, the Article Biden is Right: Vaccine Refusal ‘Has Cost All of Us’ is an opinion piece published on September 10, 2021, by the Editorial Board. The article’s audience is the general members of the public, particularly individuals above the age of 18. The article generally gives opinions about the uptake of the approved covid-19 vaccines making it a suitable text for people that are eligible to take the vaccine. The article’s main claim is that there is a need for all eligible persons to do what is right for humanity by getting the vaccine. The author lays bare the fact that since their development, vaccines have played a critical role in managing the pandemic as research shows that the majority of people that are succumbing and in the high-dependency unit are unvaccinated. The purpose of this article is to identify and analyze the effectiveness of specific rhetorical strategies employed by the authors in this article including logos, pathos, and ethos.

The Author’s Argument

The article’s main argument is that every eligible person has the primary responsibility to get the vaccine as it is the only way to keep the virus from mutating into even more hazardous strains. To save humanity, we must stop holding out on getting the vaccine. The piece revolves around the question that is on every person’s mind right now—covid-19 vaccine rollout. This follows a decision by President Biden decision to impose even stricter vaccination rules. The president’s decision requires all health care workers, federal contractors, and executive branch employees to get vaccinated. Additionally, his directive requires private businesses with more than 100 employees to take weekly tests or be vaccinated. This is all in a bid to reduce community transmission and avoid deaths now that the new Delta variant has proved to be more contagious and deadly.

The Effectiveness of Pathos in the Article

The author employs various pathos to appeal to the readers’ emotional needs. The author says “Right now, the list of the very sick and the dead is made up almost entirely of the unvaccinated. But as long as the virus continues to spread widely, it can and will evolve in ways that put everyone at risk.” This rhetorical strategy can be classified as pathos because the author tries to appeal to the readers to get the vaccine by mentioning the risk that one places themselves at if they fail to get the jab. The author talks about unvaccinated people succumbing to the virus in the hope that it will convince the nay-sayers to get it. This strategy is effective because it makes the readers think twice about not getting the vaccine. The statement plants a seed of fear of dying from the virus in the readers. It convinces the readers that losing one’s life is not worth the risk when a vaccine exists that significantly reduces mortality rates. The readers are likely to be taken aback by the statement at first. However, the readers are likely to realize that the authors are right on the notion that the vaccine is the best weapon there is against the deadly virus. The statement helps the author’s cause because it prompts one to encounter first-hand how hazardous the virus is. The statement prompts readers that are eligible for the vaccine to want to get it to keep them safe. If this statement were to be changed, the text would still be successful in passing the main message but it would probably have less effect. The number of people that would be convinced to get the vaccine would be lower.

The Effectiveness of Ethos in the Article

In addition to using pathos, the author also employs ethos in the passage as a rhetorical strategy to pass the main message to the readers. The author writes, “Yet vaccine resisters carry on about violations of their freedom, ignoring the fact that they don’t live in a bubble, and that their decision to stay unvaccinated infringes on everyone else’s freedom — the freedom to move around the country, the freedom to visit safely with friends and family, the freedom to stay alive.” The author uses this particular strategy to speak to the ethics, standards, values, and principles of the readers. The author tries to pass across the point that although there is free will, the choice to not get vaccinated not only places a person at risk but it also impacts the lives of family, friends, and their freedom of movement. The statement is effective because it makes a reader want to protect humanity by getting the vaccine. Nobody wants to be the reason why their loved ones succumb to the deadly virus when there is something one could have done to prevent it. The reader reacts to the quote by showing a sense of empathy and responsibility. It makes a person want to make an informed decision that their fellow human beings would appreciate. It makes a reader realize that no man is an island and we all need each other. The only way to curb the spread and mutation of the virus is if as many people as possible get vaccinated. The text would be less impactful if this passage was changed. This is because it carries a lot of weight in the entire article. The statement calls out the people that are resisting the vaccine by noting that vaccine rejection infringes on everyone’s freedom of movement and that to stay alive and healthy.

The Effectiveness of Logos in the Article

Furthermore, in addition to using pathos and ethos, the author also makes use of logos to appeal to the readers. The author mentions various facts that explain the need for increased uptake of vaccines. The author writes, “ Yet tens of millions more have not, allowing the more contagious Delta variant to sweep across the country, where it is now killing more than 1, 500 people in the United States daily.” Here the author uses facts and numbers to show the extent of the seriousness of slow uptake of vaccines among eligible persons. For an intellectual person, the mention of 1,500 succumbing to the virus on a daily basis evokes feelings of fear. The statement helps the cause because it makes the reader want to help solve the crisis by getting vaccinated. The fear of dying from covid-19 supersedes everything else. One had rather get the jab than start regretting if they fall ill knowing that they could have done something to prevent the ordeal. If the passage were to be changed, the text would be less impactful to the readers.

Conclusion

In closing, with the emergence of the more contagious Delta variant, there is a need for eligible persons to seriously consider getting the approved covid-19 vaccines. As much as vaccination is a personal choice, it is every person’s reasonability to play their role in fighting the pandemic. Upon reading this text, I realize that the only way for us to move forward is if we decide to unite and ensure as many people as possible get the vaccine. As the human race, we have better chances of survival if we take the vaccine. Initially, I did not care much about getting the vaccine but upon reading this piece, I am convinced that getting the vaccine is the better choice. As a human race, we must remain open-minded and embrace science wholeheartedly. Bottom line is, it is better to have the vaccine than to wait to catch the virus, as it is only a matter of time. To all eligible persons, let us all show patriotism and humanity by getting the Food Drug Administration approved vaccine closest to you.

References

The Editorial Board. (2021, September 12). Opinion | Biden Is Right: Vaccine Refusal ‘Has Cost All of Us.’ The New York Times.

Source: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/10/opinion/biden-covid-vaccine.html