Free Police Brutality At Kent State University Essay Example

Many events led up to the tragic events taking place on Kent State’s Ohio campus May 4, 1970. Many believe what the police and the Ohio National Guard did there was brutal and unfair, while others think it was justified. It is understood that protestors were warned their efforts to rally peacefully were against the rules and they were told to disperse. However, many were not willing to comply with the order because they believe their cause was just and true. Still, once the Ohio guardsmen approached them, protestors began shouting and throwing rocks at the guardsmen’s vehicle, which in the minds of many justifies a portion of the violence that took place at Kent State that day. Because the protestors began using violence, it meant the guardsmen should have been able to use violence as well. Though it is true that if the students at Kent state wanted a truly peaceful protest, the students were unable to achieve that goal. Instead it ended with violence and brutality. The guardsmen could have used the Kent State rally as an opportunity to set an example for how peaceful protests should be handled in the future, instead they took innocent lives and injured people.
The photo used here, for example used ethical appeal based on ethos to ascribe rhetoric to the situation. Based on the focal point, we assume guardsmen are acting unethical because it appears there are only a few protestors, while there are many armed guardsmen. The speaker, or photographer, in this case, is Douglas Moore, and he uses ethos in this was based on the angle of the camera. While there were many protestors on the field that day, the photo shows only six. It has the effect of invoking the viewer’s sensibilities toward the protestors. We immediately side against the guardsmen, assuming their actions were actually an overreaction. Moore is attempting to have the date remembered, as well as memorialized, thus his appeal to ethos aids his intentions, at least for those who believe the guardsmen acted out of turn against peaceful protestors.
Moore’s message also coincides with the message with the time and the circumstance. Many peaceful protests were occurring during the 1960’s and 70’s, especially on college campuses. In some instances, violence ensued. Moore’s message conveys that. Historical and contemporary audiences reacted the same, unsurprisingly. They were divided in two camps, as those for and against violence often are. Some thought the guardsmen had a right to do what they did, while others believed it was an unnecessary act of violence. Many are unaware the protestors threw rocks at the guardsmen. This fact sometimes changes the minds of audiences.
In order to produce a photo that appeals to ethos in this way, the photographer would have to believe the protestors were the innocent party in the exchange. They would also have to believe the guardsmen were the villains, and they would want a powerful photo that would convey these characteristics. The types of dress, as well as the fact that the photo is black and white allude to the photo being older. It suggests to anybody looking at the photo that it was an older incident involving the United States Military. It may help evoke feelings against the military that have been latent in some individuals, thanks to conspiracy theories and other instances that would force individuals to believe the military is a weapon of mass destruction or a force to work against the people.
Though many separate situations took place on the Kent State campus that day, the specific situation that opened an opportunity for persuasion were the shooting and consequential deaths of students. It was also the historical situation that gave rise to the composition of the accompanying text. The National Guard was undesired on the campus that day, during an otherwise peaceful protest. The protestors hurled rocks which were relatively harmless, and were rewarded with a fake retreat. Later they were fired upon. It was almost as if they were tricked, and then forced into a scare tactic situation. While the photograph drips with ethos that paints the guardsmen in an untraditionally damaging light, the story itself is also quite damaging.
The photographer themselves are able to establish ethos by having been on the campus when the shooting took place. While the photo establishes character for the students, as well as the guardsmen, audiences also need to know that they are able to trust the photographer. The photograph does enough to let the audience know students are to be trusted, while guardsmen are to be avoided. Because the photograph was taken only feet behind wounded students, it would be safe for an audience to assume the photographer was also a student, or perhaps a supportive teacher, allowing them to also claim the same credibility as the students. This would allow them to attain a certain authority. The photographer may have many intentions with the photograph, though we can be certain they desire to show wounded students cowering as the guardsmen stand unharmed and armed. They may want to attack the guardsmen, but defend the students, while dissuading future violent exchanges during peaceful protests. It would be difficult to determine a specific audience; for something so encompassing it is safe to assume the intended audience is everybody. Consequently, the essay’s audience is also everybody. Those who support the peaceful protests, as well as the violence were intended to see the photograph. The value of the audience would be priceless to the photographer because, as the photograph would reach both sides of the argument, the photographer would have a chance to use the ethos in an effort to appeal to everybody.
In sum, the main idea of the photograph is to show the result of the violence on Kent State’s campus after the protests in 1970. The photographer used ethos to show a few wounded students cowering in front of many armed and unharmed guardsmen, making it appear as though the numbers were far more uneven than they were. This was an effort to use ethos for character appeal; it allows the students to look more innocent than they really were because even though it was a peaceful protest, they did throw rocks at the guardsmen. However, by showing only a few, wounded students, the photographer is able to appeal to the audience’s emotions. We know the students were protesting peacefully, and were fired upon by the guardsmen; it allows the students to look innocent while the guardsmen look very malicious and violent. It is an expert employment of ethos.

Works Cited

Eszterhas, Joe and Michael D. Roberts. Thirteen Seconds: Confrontation at Kent State. Chicago: Gray & Company Publishers, 2012. Book.
Grace, Thomas. "Kent State Revisited." Northeast Popular Culture Association (2012): 17-21. Article.
Steidl, Christina R. "Remembering May 4, 1970: Integrating the Commemorative Field at Kent State." American Sociological Review (2013): 749-772. Article.