In this article, Alex Lubben uses rhetorical devices such as elevated diction, a criticizing tone, and appeal to logos in order to make the argument that allowing copper and gold mining in Alaska will be harmful for the environment of Bristol Bay.
The criticizing tone of the article comes from both the author's word choice and some of the quotes he decided to bring in from outside sources. He says in the first sentence "under the direction of its climate-denying head, Scott Pruitt" This sentence makes Scott Pruitt seem like a stubborn person and the development of the article makes him seem like all he wants is money. Lubben also brings in a quote from one of the people who lives in this area of Alaska saying "We're not willing to risk our way of life, our fishery for this mine." Bringing in this quote from someone who actually lives in the area that is being effected makes the article feel personal for the audience and makes them realize that putting this mine could damage more lives than it hopes to help.
Lubben also uses elevated diction by using polysyllabic words to further is argument that the mine is harmful for the people of Alaska. He mainly uses this elevated diction when talking about how the mine would be harmful for the environment. The use of the diction in these cases makes his argument easier for the audience to side with him on the case.
Finally, Lubben appeals to logos through the use of facts that help to back his claim. From using facts about the EPA increasing environmental standards in Southwestern Alaska to telling the audience how many jobs Bristol Bay supports and that will be gone if the mine was established and damaged the lake.
The criticizing tone of the article comes from both the author's word choice and some of the quotes he decided to bring in from outside sources. He says in the first sentence "under the direction of its climate-denying head, Scott Pruitt" This sentence makes Scott Pruitt seem like a stubborn person and the development of the article makes him seem like all he wants is money. Lubben also brings in a quote from one of the people who lives in this area of Alaska saying "We're not willing to risk our way of life, our fishery for this mine." Bringing in this quote from someone who actually lives in the area that is being effected makes the article feel personal for the audience and makes them realize that putting this mine could damage more lives than it hopes to help.
Lubben also uses elevated diction by using polysyllabic words to further is argument that the mine is harmful for the people of Alaska. He mainly uses this elevated diction when talking about how the mine would be harmful for the environment. The use of the diction in these cases makes his argument easier for the audience to side with him on the case.
Finally, Lubben appeals to logos through the use of facts that help to back his claim. From using facts about the EPA increasing environmental standards in Southwestern Alaska to telling the audience how many jobs Bristol Bay supports and that will be gone if the mine was established and damaged the lake.