The Rhetorical Precis “pray –see”

SENTENCE ONE: In his ____editorial ______, __“Please Do Not Let Your Employer Microchip You”__ , (article, essay, short story, editorial, speech) (title of text appropriately punctuated) author __Christian Schneider__ ______contends____________ that (name of author) (rhetorically accurate verb: argues, suggests, notes, etc.) _allowing companies to microchip their employees is both horrifying and dangerous. (the author’s main assertion, argument, position, etc. [thesis]).

SENTENCE TWO: __ Schneider __ develops/supports his__contention___ by first, (author’s last name) (change rhetorical verb to noun) __citing a science fiction story in which the government controlled people through chip implants, __then __implying that the chip will become a way for companies to invade one’s privacy,___ and finally,___ he accuses those who are in favor of the chip of being followers, and warns of the dangers of jumping on the bandwagon. (accusing, implying, comparing, illustrating, defining, proving, etc.)

SENTENCE THREE __ Schneider's __’s (author) purpose is to __ highlight the potential danger and (author’s last name) (persuade, criticize, explain, entertain, inform, describe) absurdity of microchipping people_ in order to in order to convince his audience that microchipping could lead to a loss of personal freedoms and privacy._ (what author wants reading audience to react to: feel and/or do)

SENTENCE FOUR _ Schneider __ uses a ___humorous yet cautionary___ tone for __________ (author’s last name) (tone word 1) (tone word 2) __readers who might be faced with deciding whether or not they should get “chipped.”_. (author’s intended audience)

The Final Product… In his editorial, “Please Do Not Let Your Employer Microchip You,” Author Christian Schneider contends that allowing companies to microchip their employees is both horrifying and dangerous. Schneider supports this contention by first citing a science fiction story in which the government controlled people through chip implants, then implying that the chip will become a way for companies to invade one’s privacy, and finally he accuses those who are in favor of the chip of being followers, and warns of the dangers of jumping on the bandwagon. Schneider’s purpose is to highlight the absurdity and potential dangers of microchip implants in human beings in order to convince his audience that microchipping could lead to a loss of personal freedoms and privacy. Schneider uses a humorous yet cautionary tone for readers who might be faced with deciding whether or not they should get “chipped.”