The outcome of Doctorow’s article argues the side that otherproducts would be better to have.
However, Doctorow refuses to state thepositives of the iPad, which makes the consumer believe that there may be someunderlying facts that are either unknown to Doctorow, or he is simply notspeaking about due to his bias.Doctorow does not state any positives about the iPad, whichshows that he is extremely biased against Apple. He doesn’t give the readeranything to weigh against the cons of the device.
He also fails to relate tothe common consumer by using complex diction that relates to technology, suchas DRM, that they may not understand.Doctorow’s article does have a few weaknesses, which cause it tonot entirely fulfill its purpose. He has a fairly obvious bias againstcorporations due to them being able to control more than many othercorporations. His bias causes the points of Apple controlling what is able tobe on the device slightly less relevant. Also, he says that because of Applecontrolling what is on the device consumers can’t create their own programs, however,not everyone is a programmer, so those people won’t care about this “issue.
” Doctorow also quotes William Gibson, an American-Canadianfiction writer, which aids in showing ethos. Doctorow strengthens his integrityby recognizing that he may also need information from an outside, reliablesource by using a quote from another author. Doctorow also appeals to pathos bysaying “I don’t want my universe of apps constrained to the stuff that theCupertino Politburo decides to allow for its platform.” (Doctorow). He makesthe reader think about the common human fear of being entirely controlled byreferencing the Communist party of the Soviet Union.
Doctorow stirs up feelingsof rebellion because of being told what we are supposed to do as opposed towhat we want to do.Doctorow created this article to persuade the consumers into notbuying the iPad by telling then how limited the content on it is and howlimited the hardware of the product is. He states that he believes that theiPad is not revolutionizing the world of technology like Apple had said it was.
He uses these facts, and his comparison of Apple’s iStore to Wal-mart to attractthe reader’s logic. He is trying to cause the reader’s thought process tounderstand how corporations affect them. The iPad only allows for the programsthat Apple approves of to be run on it meaning that anything else that someonewould wish to run that Apple didn’t approve of or haven’t heard of will not beon the iStore.Cory Doctorow’s article, “Why I Won’t Buy aniPad (and Think You Shouldn’t, Either),” is a review on the iPad. Doctorow is asuccessful writer and has been surrounded by technology for his entire career.He uses his former knowledge of technology, facts about Apple, and appeals tothe consumer to reinforce the idea that the iPad limits the content that can beused and created with it.