Hari’s purpose for publishing this article is to both inform and persuade his audience that addiction is not all about chemical hooks, and that addicts in recovery should be both perceived and treated in a new light. To support this stance, Hari introduces personal anecdotes, outside resources, statistical data, and the use of diction to reinforce his opinion among his audience. Being that this article is published by The Huffington Post, Hari’s direct audience reaches an educated left leaning demographic ranging from the ages of 18-34 year old. Among this pool of people, Hari is specifically speaking to non addicts, and he demonstrates this through word choice. This use of word choice is significance because Hari is assuming that he is speaking on behalf of all addicts. This impairs the validity of his argument because no two addiction cases are the same, meaning one treatment may work for some but not …show more content…
By detailing an account from his own childhood, in which he was unable to wake a relative from a drug overdose, Hari quickly utilizes the appeal of pathos to draw in his audience. “I had a quite personal reason to set out for these answers. One of my earliest memories as a kid is trying to wake up one of my relatives, and not being able to” (Hari 1). This personal anecdote from Hari’s childhood is effective because it establishes an emotional connection with both the audience and the topic of discussion. By doing this, Hari demonstrates that his drive to unlock the inner workings of addiction stem from a meaningful and honest source. This gives his audience the ability to connect with his argument through a much greater and powerful shared connection: whether it be from similar past experiences or Hari’s ability to inflict sympathy within his readers. Now that Hari’s has successfully drawn in his audience, he utilizes this point in his article to launch into his first piece of evidence being the famous Rat Park