Analysis of Phase Two Podcast

   From the start I knew that writing for an audience that would be read aloud was going to provide it's own unique challenges.  My initial impression of the phase two podcast wasn't something of a negative feeling.  I actually enjoyed the development of my soon to be recorded podcast.  However, the information I had to organize for the podcast proved to be the most difficult part to me.  This was because I had to realize the time contraints in conjunction with accurate direct information on my topic of GMO labeling to fit with in.
   In comparison to the written Webtext (which provided a whole separate type of conflict to me), the podcast actually came to me a bit easier.  I attribute this ease to come from the obligation to narrow down the information only providing relevant and easily understood information.  In this restraint of information share, I found that the choices I made (from the appeals used down to the structure of ideas) differed greatly between the two.  In the Webtext there was an ability, more a requirement, to fully develop the ideas that were being presented about my topic.  With no real limitations to word count the development of ideas came rather easily.  In contrast, the podcast script was geared toward fully understood topics with little bits of research to back them up.
   In that fundamental difference between the Webtext and podcast script, I selected information for the podcast that could be absorbed easily by the listener.  With that decision came the type of appeal I plan to use to help facilitate that information transition.  The choice I made was a combination of logos and pathos.  The logos aspect of my podcast was in the statistics, and "short jabs" used at the expense of the corporations I was talking against. Pathos was then used to pull the listener in to the fight and make them feel as if they had the control to stop the string of corporate uncertainties.
   Also noted through out the text is the verbal citing used to help give creditability to my claims.  Unlike in the written Webtext, the podcast script had to rely on such citing given the obvious consideration of there being a listener rather a reader.  So with the aspect of hearing over reading, giving verbal credit to the experts and sources used was important so that the reader can grasp those expert opinions used. Additionally, this difference has also played a significant role in the ethos developed through out my podcast script.  
   Overall, though there was many differences between context, rhetorical appeals, and structure, the Webtext and podcast script came down to the same basic research and marketing decisions.  The research that backs the Webtext is the same research methods used to develop the podcast script.  Same also applies to the marketing questions used when developing the argument in both.  Given that the arguments were very similar is goes without question how the focus in both stayed similar.  This similarity created an overall cause to drive both projects in a direction of action upon the readers or listeners.