In the revision of my Spinning Science project, I made several changes in response the helpful comments of both my peers and Dr. Colvin. The biggest change I made in my revision was the addition of a conclusion. Both my peers and Dr. Colvin stressed to me that each portion that was presented needed to be better linked and the claims that I made needed to have a purpose. Therefore, I used the conclusion to analyze how each part came together to come to the conclusion of convincing the viewer to donate. Furthermore, I explained how all my claims demonstrated how the science apparent in this advertisement was not cancer research, but rather the science of advertising and that the way in which the advertisement was presented, making a heavy use of pathos, posed the question of whether or not it is smart for consumers to consider emotion when making monetary decisions.

Another change I made was to analyze the colors in the background in “The Appeal to Emotion” in order to make a better contrast to the colors in “The Suggestion of Hope” and “The Request”.

I also made some minor word choice changes to make the writing flow better.

I choose not to discuss the reasoning behind Cancer Research UK’s decision to request 2 pounds a month and instead leave the focus on why it would be better to also give the option for a one-time donation because I wanted the overall focus to be on how and why the consumer would perceive the advertisement rather than focus on the monetary goals of the foundation.

My main goal in the revision was to better connect the entire project and to consider the specific rhetoric of my own analysis in order to make a claim about the science of advertisement and to pose a question for further analysis of the extent of emotion in advertising and purchasing.