Steroids are a bigger problem now then they’ve ever have been. They’ve always been a problem but they’ve been incognito to the public eye. The New York Times bring up a troubling issue that’s been going on for years and that is the misuse of steroids in professional level sports.
The New York Times recently featured an article entitled “Steroids in Sports” Oct 11, 2012. In this article the times aims to convince their readers that steroid use is bad if not worse then ever before. “Drug suspension in the sport kept descending… but now they are climbing again.” In doing so they capture the audience’s attention by showing the effects of steroids misuse and the huge consequences that come with abusing steroids are some techniques that they use to skillfully create a strong, convincing article.
The Times begins the article reflecting on the abuse of steroids in sports, describing, “much of the focus” of steroid misuse has been with Major League Baseball and cycling yet the Olympics is “under scrutiny” as well. The Times uses logos to back up their statement saying, “In the 2012 Summer Olympics in London, 11 athletes were barred for illegal drug use.” The technique has immediately established the article as informal and personal. It is a great way to capture and maintain the readers interest. The Times uses this particular technique as a way to reach out and relate to the audience. For instance, the second paragraph informs the reader about the harmful effects that steroids can have on you. WebMD touches upon the same subject and supplies side effect after side effect some included: heart attacks, mood swings, decrease sperm count, and many others. Information relating to possible health issues opens the readers doors and often times intrigues one to really listen whole heartedly.
The next paragraph states, “… most sports have banned steroid use… underground suppliers… stayed a step ahead of even the most stringent testing programs.” The Times strategically uses pathos to inform the audience that the misuse of steroids has severe consequences and is unethical. Imhoff & Associates, PC website shows that one can face up to “five years in prison under federal law” for the possession of steroids.
About a third of the way through the article, The Times make a transition from contrast to comparison. They begin focusing on the idea that all steroid instances aren’t bad. “Not all revelations of steroid use are accompanied by outrage.” The Times use contrast to illustrate that not all cases of steroid use turn to an outrage. Then in comparison they say, “some of baseballs most cherished storylines have been tainted by performance enhancing drugs…” In 2005, Jose Canesco blew the lid off Major League Baseball’s steroid scandal with his best seller Juiced. He made a bold statement stating, “The challenge is not to find a top player who has used steroids. The challenge is to find a top player who hasn’t.” (Canseco)
The times continue the article by showing the history of steroids and how nothing has been done. Baseball commissioner Fay Vincent 89-92 didn’t crack down on steroid use until his last year on the job. A new commissioner stepped in, Bud Selig he downplayed steroid use as well for the entire 90’s. Selig even said in 95, “if baseball has a problem, I must say candidly that we were not aware of it.” The Times uses ethos as a prime example showing that baseball commissioners and the baseball union have known about the problem for years yet nothing has been done about the problem.
After quite a few years later the commissioner and the union finally agreed on a testing policy. The Times emphasis on “finally” sarcastically pokes fun at how long it took to take action in it all. The use of vocabulary that the article uses helps the audience get the underlying message by keeping it simple. The most recent press release about drug testing was in 2005 on MLB.com they announced that there would be...