Mobile phone mennace
The speech ‘Mobile Phone Menace’ by Professor GK Charles implies that mobile phones do not only pose a threat to the safety of drivers but also to the rest of society. Charles argues in a frustrated tone throughout the speech many facts, statistics and uses images and also techniques in order to give his audience and listeners a clear view of why mobile phone usage whilst driving should be heavily banned, frowned upon and less common for the safety of everyone. Charles firstly displays an image to his audience.
The photograph shows a young man looking sideways while holding a mobile phone in one hand. Instantly the audience is made aware of the actions of using a mobile phone while driving, it is a distraction. This may also appeal to a reader’s sense of security by suggesting that we could also be victims of such an accident if we were in the “car coming into view from behind. ” The opening of the speech supports the photograph, this is seen by describing the photograph and then questioning the actions of the driver such as “Isn’t he taking a great risk?
” This questions the reader to think about the consequences of using a mobile phone while driving. Throughout Charles seems to put out to the audience the danger and distraction of a mobile phone when driving in heavy traffic. “Is he about to hit the car in front? ” Charles involves the audience in the argument quoting, “Have you ever driven behind someone using a mobile phone while driving? ” This creates a feeling to the audience that puts a situation upon them and makes it easier to feel in danger. Charles wants the audience to feel a lack of respect to those who use mobile phones on the road.
In a mocking tone it can be seen when Charles says, “It’s an image thing as well… some strange way of raising self-esteem or social status. ” This categorises the drivers by implying they are ‘showing off’. To display the lack of importance we should people who use mobile phones while driving, Charles says “…an inflated sense of their own importance. ” The reader is made to think that these drivers are self-centered and they do not care about the safety of others, creating feeling to the audience of no good. The continuous use of evidence creates seriousness to Charles’ contention.
Showing and displaying results such as “reputable UK study of 40 000 drivers” Charles aims to promote feelings of distress and fear amongst the audience. He says that “SUV drivers were 16 times more likely to crash than other drivers. ” Immediately this triggers the feeling that it is crucial that the ban on using mobile phones while driving is maintained. It gives a sense of helplessness in the reader, implying that they are in danger if they are driving on the same roads of those who use mobile phones while driving, which is a key persuasion from the audience into Charles’ contention.
Expert opinion is also stated as Charles quotes the Medical Journal of Australia. By providing the specific details of how using mobile phones while driving can distract the driver, “…eyes off the road…eg, when reading a text…”, provides Charles with a sense of authority, this evidence seems impossible to argue with in the eyes of the audience positioning the reader to agree with his viewpoint. Charles ends the speech by referring back to the photograph and deciding the fate of the young driver, “I hope the young man in the photograph did not cause a crash but he probably will one day.
” Charles implies that every driver who uses mobile phones while driving are bound to crash sometime in their life. This view aims to pull the reader into accepting Charles point of view since it suggests that anyone who opposes or disagrees with this idea is supporting the idea that using mobile phones while driving is safe. This shows audiences are encouraged to realize that any opposition to Charles viewpoint is wrong and impossible to be right. Charles ends his speech by using inclusive language again. He says “We must keep the ban on drivers using mobile phones.
” This suggests that anyone who is against this idea is not only against Charles but also the majority of society. Charles presents a well-argued and put together speech. His use of persuasive devices and techniques such as evidence, inclusive language and many more influences the reader closer and closer to his contention. The repetitive use of evidence is quite powerful and hard to counter argue against. This being said, Charles enables the reader to see that the ban on mobile phones while driving is indeed a law that must be maintained.