The piece is a scary but true insight into the power of the media and its many controlling facets. It continues to discuss the influential words of the ‘anonymous’ and where these unknown quips can lead. It is the opinion of the journalist in the film, but is made somewhat factual through the ‘news reporter’ style of the video and the use of ‘facts’ and familiar stories.

It was persuasive and telling, keeping me listening and on the edge of my seat until the end.

What a tragedy it is that mole hills can be made so easily into mountains causing catastrophic repercussions because of anonymous hearsay.

Emotional strings are pulled via the compelling story of the mistaken identity of the Brazilian electrician (pathos), and this creates a definite state of shock through fact. This use of fact, figures and dates creates a more concrete and viable persuasive text as it uses information that is ‘real’.

However the piece is about the news and how we are at times misinformed or lead to believe certain things from anonymous sources, so the piece is kind of contradictory to itself because it is saying ‘believe me I’m a journalist, but, by the way, journalists do lie’.  So how much of this persuasive text should we as a viewer really be lead to believe?