Rhetorical Analysis of Project 3

Entering Project 3, I have decided that my topic will be fracking in Oklahoma and the numerous earthquakes it is causing.

AUTHOR

1. Personally, I am interested in this topic because I am from Oklahoma and my family has experienced damages to our home due to the recent influx of earthquakes in our state.  None of the buildings in Oklahoma were built with infrastructures to withstand up to 5.3 earthquakes.  I also have strong opinions on the way our state government is addressing the problem and working with the big oil companies.
2. The biggest "bias" I might have is the fact that I've grown up in Oklahoma and experienced these earthquakes and what they're doing to people's homes, including my own.  Seeing how our state legislature doesn't seem to be doing anything about it, most feel that they are focusing more on a short term monetary gain, rather than the long-term effects on the people and their well being.  It's also noted that earthquakes receive more or less publicity depending on the location they hit. 

AUDIENCE

1. For this project, my audience will be focused on residents of Oklahoma (especially ones concerned with home damage) and perhaps even the people who hold positions in the state government (Although they may be more of an indirect audience).
1. Many people are assuming that the oil companies and the majority of the people leading our state government are purely out for money ventures and are refusing to see the negative consequences of fracking because the huge oil companies could easily be sued.  However, oil is one of Oklahoma's major income sources, which gives the government the incentive to try to keep up the image of the oil companies.
2. The people who have had home damage might not bee too surprised by this matter; however there could be other homeowners who have neglected to see this connection, so then this may come as a surprise.  The state government/oil companies might be angered by the article, since it could threaten their goals.
3. I think the fact that I come from Oklahoma and the fact that I along with others I know have experienced damage to our homes makes me more relateable to the audience.  
4. Target people include people in Oklahoma who's homes have been damaged by earthquakes, as well as other state government figures, such as Mary Fallin.  I would hope to convince her that fracking only presents short term benefits, but leaves longer lasting negative consequences.

Purpose/Message

1. After listening to my podcast, I'd like my audience to see how underhanded some of our state government members and oil companies are.  And I'd also like them to take action by petitioning or publicly expressing their concern in some fashion.
2. Once all the research is complete,  I think it is also important to mention to the people of Oklahoma that there is also a possibility that fracking can contaminate drinking water, and if anything, it greatly increases overall pollution.  People also need to be aware that although oil is important to the state's economy,  it's supposed short term benefits to not merit the long term damage caused by these earthquakes.  

WHAT GENRE?

1. For this project, I will be doing a podcast.
2. Expectations for this genre include an engaging speaker, background music/sounds, sound clips of others speaking.
3. I have no prior history of podcast work.  I'm praying for beginner's luck.
4. Comfort level?  ----I'm not super comfortable.  This project seems a little more difficult than my last project (video essay) because I can't rely on visual elements to fill the gaps.  I will be relying solely on voice, and will have to make sure to have inflection and variance in the way I speak.
5. Most effective conventions include transitional music that matches the subject content (allows audience time to digest what they hear and helps set the mood), and an engaging voice that pauses to allow the audience to breathe and think about the situation.

WHEN?

1. There is a law signed by the governor, Mary Fallin, that  bans others from banning fracking in their areas.  She claims this is best for the state because otherwise without fracking, our economy would be ruined.  
2.  Sources:
• Fracking Bans Are No Longer Allowed in Oklahoma
• Counter Argument: Some Oklahoma citizens claim that there is too much time and distance from earthquake epicenters and fracking sites for there to be correlation. (Oil Production Fuels Earthquake Surge in Oklahoma)
• Geologists Link Oklahoma Earthquakes to Fracking Waste Disposal
• USGS: Fracking disposal wells are the cause of earthquakes in Oklahoma
• Counter-argument: Mary Fallin says we need to leave the fracking to the "experts" and not have civilians trying to run the oil business. (Fallin Signs Bill to Prevent Cities, Towns, and Counties from Fracking Bans) 
• Counter Argument: Oil tycoon, Boone Pickens, argues that the epicenters of the earthquakes and the places of fracking sites are too far away for them to be correlated. (Boone Pickens Doesn't Thing Fracking is Causing Earthquakes)