John Jones Letter to the Editor ‘not in Our Area, Please’

John Jones letter to the editor ‘Not in our area, please’ is expressed in casual form. In Jones’ letter he uses a very incensed and exasperated tone to convey to the concerned community that ‘Should a toxic waste dump be established?’ John Jones emphasises on the health risks and economic problems to alert the local community that a potential toxic waste dumping will jeopardise many lives.

John Jones informs the community that this toxic waste dumping consist of ’70,00 chemicals’ and less than 10% of these chemicals have yet to be tested for detrimental effects to our nervous system. This is an argumentative technique called the use of ‘evidence’, this dispenses the writer’s argument more credibility as it is objective and/or supported by experts. John Jones endorses his argument with a mixture of concern and indignation. Furthermore, John Jones utilises statistics as it is seen as unbiased and factual. However the “evidence” isn’t supported with an unreliable source, implying that the presented statistics are possibly forged. Because of this mistake it is likely that John Jones wrote this article for the local to react emotionally.

John Jones reargues with another statistic stating that ‘And studies show that even with the best quality control, leakage affects ground water and seeps out into soil’ and ending his point with a rhetorical question ‘Should government be able to gamble with our health and that of our children?’ which paints an image of how dangerous this toxic waste dump can be. John Jones uses both argument and language technique but the technique with the most impact is the language technique - rhetorical question as it provides a argument technique called ‘appeal to family values.’ This is effective because it positions the reader to agree by assuming that their answers are the same as the writer’s and to feel the other arrangements threaten the ‘moral fabric’ of society. To show his concern, he formulates