While Seattle has negative reputation for its sports fans, Jerry argued that its virtual image should be re-considered with their real images. His attempt to support the claim- such as uses of facts and quotes, and emotional appeals are seems reasonable, however, fails in terms of degree in persuasion. fails because they are nothing but just an exaggeration, an excuse and consolation.
Jerry drew true image of Seattle sports fans by giving facts and quotes. to overwrite their "quiet fan" stereotype. Having high number of sold tickets, laudest studium and best homecourt; praiseworthly support even teams are in longtime-loose; ---these are the "real" Seattle fans according to Jerry. Although these facts are true, they do not support the claim completely. Nothing is proven that how these facts can prove that they are not boring fans. Even though all the tickets were sold, if people went home before the games over, it is not passionate fans. Even though they made the studium laudest, it could be fans from opposing team. Supporting even though the team keep loosing could be interpreted as bad fans who doesjn't care weather they win or not.
Jerry also draw haw Seattle fans are used to be seen in the past still bothers them today. He pointed out the characteristic of historical Seattle, saying that it represents how others see the fans. I think what he is trying to prove here is too forcible. His reasoning; because the city is old, the people are seen as old too, therefore Seattle fans are seen as quite boring fans, is logical but not valid. For instance, there are many people who does not represent the city. Plus, the example of how L. A. and Chicago fans are seen, could be any fans of any states. How people see the city does not do with how they see the sports fans. There are no connection between these two, since no connectionare proven. Therefore, how people see Seattle sport fan is not perception or city reflection, but shows reality.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment