Speech #1 outline

1. Purpose  
1. To inform the audience of the new Kia Niro and for Kia to get there name out there more
1. How: through humor and celebrity endorsement
1. Humor: made it humours by making common ideas funny
2. Shows Melissa McCarthy trying to be eco friendly in a humorous way
3. Relatable because a lot people would like to be eco friendly
4. Celebrity endorsement: used a funny and unproblematic actress to portray the issues     
2. Effectiveness
1. I would say it wasn't all the effective at selling you the product because it didn’t inform the audience that well of what they are selling
2. I do think that they made the brand more recognizable through its humor, but it didn't give that much information on the product itself    

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_jtnsrDjr8M

This commercial in from the 2017 super bowl.  In this commercial, Melissa McCarthy can be seen helping with a lot of known economical issues.  I think the purpose of this commercial was to make the new Kia more recognizable.  It was shown in the super bowl, so a wide variety of people saw this commercial, however, I think the audience is young adults who are looking to buy a car.  It is obvious that there are many issues in our economy and this commercial shows the audience some of the problems in a humous way by using Melissa McCarthy.  I think by pairing a serious topic with a humors appeal, it makes the commercial work.  I think this commercial was effective because it is easy to remember and it talks enough about the car to make people curious, but left out enough that people would have to do more research.  

peer review comments for my paper

strengths and weaknesses

1. strengths: a. uses good in text citations with good explanations for evidence
                    b. has a good reference page
                    c. sections the paper well so it is easy to read and understand what the author is talking about               about
   weaknesses: a. could've used more evidence from interview
                        b. the non-acedmic section could have included more evidence
                        c. i dont like how the author started with a quote
2. strength: a.  short and to the point
                   b. uses a lot of evindence from the interview
                   c. explained the evidence well
    weaknesses: a. too causal for the assignment
                         b.  not sectioned so hard to follow the authors thoughts
                         c. very short and a bad reference page
3. strengths: a. uses a lot of in text citations
                     b. good use of division of ideas - makes the paper flow better
                     c. good reference page
  weaknesses: a. over explains evidence - repeats ideas a lot
                      b. short conclusion
                      c.  doesn't use enough evidence from interview
4. strength: a. explains evidence well and links it back to claim
                   b.  uses a lot of evidence to support claim
                   c.  flows very easily
    weaknesses: a. lengthy intro paragraph
                         b. short conclusion
                         c. could explain better for people who are not engineers
5. strengths: a.  good introduction
                     b. uses a lot of evidence to back up claim
                     c. organizes paper well
   weakness: a. kinda choppy - doesn't flow very well
                     b. doesn't have a very good reference page
                     c. short conclusion