Read the students paragraphs about articles and give a positive response, you should describe how you agree with and where and why. And further feedback. The response should be at least 65 words.

1) Katherine Choi is the writer to the Response to "When Life Imitates Video," according to her background she is a student who annotated John Leo's piece and then developed her critical response towards it. The writer's purpose is to prove that John Leo is unable to achieve his purpose of proving his argument that video games lead to violent behaviors through his piece "When Life Imitates Video." The general topic is video games and their connection to violent behaviors; however, Choi is mostly focused on presenting her analysis on a previous writing so her main topic this video games issue, but instead a critical response towards John Leo. Katherine Choi's annotation and analysis of John Leo's writing created the need for her to argue that he does not do a great job addressing this issue and proving his argument. For the most part, Choi utilizes the appeal to logic as her sources of evidence. She quotes specific examples from John Leo's writing and it's just a fact that he wrote these statements. Nothing is made up, and that's what established credibility, because the reader can simply refer to Leo's piece and make a connection to what Choi is pointing out. There really isn't an argument's thesis specifically stated in Choi's response, she just begins by stating John Leo's position on the issue of video games, and goes from there clearly showing what she's trying to prove. The writer organizes the argument in a way that makes the reader understand where exactly did Leo committed errors through his writing. Most of her piece is made up of evidence, quotes extracted from Leo's writing that join in to prove and support the point she's trying to make. As mentioned before, the writer utilizes a variety of evidence to prove her argument and clearly shows what factors and methods affected Leo's writing. The use of simile, metaphors and allusions is not really present in Choi's writing. After analysis this piece, I believe Katherine Choi did a great job proving her argument and showing her point that John Leo had several errors through his writing that prevented him from successfully addressing the issue and proving his argument.

2) Jason Savona, a student, wrote an article titled “Response to Grand Theft Auto IV” which was about a video game poster and what it portrays about the video game itself. Savona claims that the poster promotes violence and focuses on power and murder instead of skill to play the game. Savona being a male student, assumingely young, could have experience playing these games within the past couple years of writing the article. This could play a role in his position in the argument, having first hand experience with violent video games. Savona appeals to logic when he points out that the gun in the poster is bigger than the skyline behind him, proving that the main focus is on guns and violence. The thesis is in the last sentence of the first paragraph: “As a result, it appeals more to those who are looking for video games that depict murder and other crimes than to those who choose a video game on the basis of the skill it requires.” This placement of the thesis sets up the article for evidence of the claims that were made. Savona organizes the article in a way that proves effective for his argument by explaining who the hero in the story is, Niko Bellic, and then calling into question how his character is used. This proves effective in the argument because it shows the hero isn't really a hero. He gives evidence by observation of the poster by pointing out that the gun being held is the biggest part of the poster and proving that violence is the most important part of the game. This proves very effective in the argument. Savona uses an allusion when he talks about Niko Bellic being a war veteran and how he should be looking for peace but instead finds war. Overall, I think Savona made the text clear to understand with the way he described and explained the poster in detail and compared it to violent behavior. He articulated his position in the argument and supported his claims with plenty of evidence.