Youth Reckless Driving Prevention
- This ad begins by going from a black screen to four teenagers in a car being viewed from the front.
- Three of the four ‘teenagers’ actually appear to be in their teens, while the fourth is being portrayed by actor Rob Riggle who greets the others with a casual: “What’s up”
- The other kid in the backseat introduces Rob as ‘his friend from Michigan’
- The two kids in the front seat don’t really acknowledge him.
- The driver pulls away, looking focused, while the passengers stare out the windows looking relaxed.
- A few seconds pass in silence and then Rob notices how the driver seems to be picking up speed at an alarming rate. Riggle leans forward and suggests that he slow down.
- The driver, while still remaining very focused on the road, responds only with an aggressive: “No.”
- Riggle leans back with a very surprised look and proceeds to take out a video camera and start recording. He’s almost in disbelief.
- The driver’s stone-faced expression softens and he appears to concerned and possibly even worried.
- The driver quickly asks what Riggle is doing to which he replies: “Shooting a viral video!” He goes on the suggest that it’s the last five minutes the teens are going to have on Earth.
- You can start to notice increasingly worried looks on the other two passengers’ eyes but they continue to sit in silence.
- Riggle also suggests that the other teens apologize to their mothers hinting that they’re all going to get into a fatal car accident.
- The ad comes to a close with the car driving out of frame before the screens fades to black.
The Gamer 2.0
SleepyCat
Coffee Lover 03
doglover7025
Snowman10
excellentstudent27
Gymrat
hockeyfan
holistic25
ilovebeesss
ilovemydog
The Gamer
Naturechild101
BreakingBad45
ravensfan8
temporal111
thatpersonoverthere
toetio
username1132005
Calm&Patient
webbwrestler135
Counterintuitive Spring 2024 
Thank you, madewithrealginger, for being the second to publish. I appreciate the opportunity to offer feedback your classmates might read before the deadline (which is fast approaching). If you read my Reply to Moneytrees, you know I can lay on the commentary pretty thick. Let’s see what happens when I read your post.
Paragraph 1. You compare young adventurous Charlie Brown with the satirically depressed, middle aged Charlie. Why, madewithrealginger? We remember Charlie. This version is different. The new version is paired with words and used as a header. Did you want to tell us something about that?
Your perfectly reasonable response will probably be: It’s an introduction. I am telling readers what they need to know to understand the point I will make in P2. That’s fair. But it’s not necessary, not advisable, to waste your first paragraph (roughly half of your post) “warming up.”
Here are alternatives that probably don’t represent your thinking, but which engage readers in an exchange of ideas using the same subject matter:
1. Lovable Charlie Brown, the adventurous boy from the Peanuts cartoons, seems a very unlikely symbol for an international “free speech” movement. OR:
2. The slovenly, depressed, middle-aged Charlie Brown cartoon the graphic uses to portray the Je Suis Charlie movement makes us wonder what sort of speech we want to be free to speak. OR:
3. The warped Charlie Brown in the blog header reminds us that not all speech is pleasant, and not all cartoons are meant to amuse.
As I say, I’m not trying to suggest a viewpoint to you. Instead, I’m suggesting that you can and should start, develop, and conclude all your writing with a series of compelling ideas, right from the start.
Paragraph 2. You’re right, madewithrealginger, the pairing spurs thinking. But, about what? “Meanings and relationships” are not ideas; they’re just categories of language. If you don’t suggest a single meaning or relationship, you’re leaving all the work to your readers. I promise you, they won’t help. They want your guidance. Instead, you have continued your introduction another sentence into your text.
That the morbid sketch is a metaphor is a fine idea, madewithrealginger. You could have opened with it and spent your 125 words developing it. There’s still time to do so by midnight, and I heartily encourage you to do so. It’s worth your time.
Is it a very dark time for cartoonists everywhere? Why? Because they feel constrained to say less? Because they are grieving for their lost colleagues? Because they like to be funny, but the massacre has taken the joy out of drawing gags for a living? You could easily make a good post out of this idea too. Don’t wait until the last sentence to hint at what you might have written.
You show skill at language, madewithrealginger, and your ideas, when you share them, are perfectly fine. I hope my comments will embolden you to trust in their value and present them with more vigor and conviction.
LikeLike