Description

Dixon:

The subject line shows "Private Message" and "excdavid@googlemail.com" in the "Reply To" section.

There is a London address in the email heading that belongs to "BARRISTER DAVID DIXON" (all in uppercase letters). The first paragraph asks the reader to take "due consideration" of the email's importance in the first sentence, then explains how Barrister D.Dixon got the recipient's email address and why he is sending the information by email rather than by post. It further asks the recipient to read the rest of the email with "all seriousness of purpose devoid of any doubt in (their) mind" and says "this deal" (which has never before been mentioned or identified in this email) is based on "Trust, Confidentiality, and Sincerity of purpose in order to have an Acceptable meeting of the minds." In this paragraph, he also says that he was searching online for "reputable and reliable" persons.

In addition to the capitalization of words describing character qualities in the previous sentence of the email, three other words are capitalized: "Email" and "Certified mail/ Post-mail."

The next paragraph describes the sender and his late client who died three years prior. The sender identifies with the recipient by saying the recipient shares the same last name as the client and also uses pathos by including certain words in the two sentences describing the crash. "All occupants of the vehicle unfortunately lost their lives (emphasis added)," and "wife and only daughter."

The third paragraph explains the senders inability to find any of the client's relatives as well as how he found the recipient's name. This paragraph is creating an indirect appeal to the reader as well as a sense of desperation (the recipient is the last person who could benefit from the deceased's money). In the last sentence of this paragraph, the sender again uses identification by saying "we" and presenting his contact of the email recipient as benefiting the email recipient. The sentence that he does this in is the same in which he explains how and why he contacted the recipient. It is a very long run-on sentence which contains 6 commas. He says he found the recipient online through "reputable"

The next paragraph begins by detailing the amount of money (J5,550,000) that the client's "consignment" consists of, and thn describes the actual problem, which is that the "Finance house will confiscate the money if a next-of-kin is not presented in the next ten days. ( It is interesting that "ten" is the only number in this email that is not both spelled out and followed by its numerical representation in brackets.) He then asks to present the recipient as the next of kin, saying that they would split the money 50% (also interesting that this number is not spelled out).

The fifth paragraph "guarantees" that this would be done under a "legitimate arrangement," the recipient would be protected, and further states that all the necessary documents are in place , so only the recipient's consent is still needed. He also says he is the only attorney in the case, that only attorneys can produce the beneficiary of the deceased, according to the "international law of inheritance" (shouldn't this be capitalized?).

The final paragraph assures the recipient that his "honest cooperation" is all that is needed, and asks for him to contact the sender "via (his) email address" and then send in his phone number so the sender can "further explain more about this transaction." (what more is to explain, if all that is still needed is the client's "willing cooperation?")

There are many grammar errors in this email - punctuation (especially comma splices), capitalization, and improper usage of certain words (mainly adjectives) and double negatives.

This rhetorical situation (asking the recipient to knowingly conspire against the law and respond to the sender/attorney to establish the "deal") is different from the one in the other email. It is primarily asking the recipient to respond and provide personal information The second email is significantly shorter than the other and does not appear to be imitating a business letter, as there is no header. The email as a whole conveys a sense of urgency and tries to make everything seem very easy for the recipient to simply go along with his plan.

Mueller:

The subject is "UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE" (all in upper case letters) and to "undisclosed -recipients."

The email opens with "Attn: Sir, " signaling urgency and also singling the recipient as masculine. It then cancels the sense of urgency with the first part of the opening sentence (which should be its own sentence rather than attached to the other with a comma) "Compliments of the day." Yet the rest of the sentence tells the recipient that his payment has been released and he needs to contact the payment officer with the following information (all in uppercase letters): Full name, home address, "tell," "cell," current occupation, bank name, and age. Says that Mr. Kelvin Williams of the "ATM PAYMENT CENTER" is the one to be contacted (his email address is the one listed in the "reply-to" line).

The next paragraph tells the recipient that "all necessary documents " have been put in place. All he will heed to do is be sure he can "be able to afford 110 USD for the Delivery of (his) Funds" which will be sent on an "ATM SWIFT CARD" using FedEx International Courier Service. The wording of the first sentence in this paragraph ("Also please be informed") is attempting to convey courtesy and establish ethos. THere is no punctuation in this paragraph - the whole paragraph is one large run-on sentence.

The next paragraph is one sentence also. The first word is not capitalized, "Investigation" is, and "ATM SWIFT CARD" is all in capital letters again. THe sentence again asks for the recipient's response so "we can move on" with "the investigation." (This is the first time any "investigation" is mentioned, and the email never directly specifies what exactly it involves, who is instigating it, circumstances, etc.).

The next paragraph is only one sentence also and merely thanks the reader and indicates that he hopes to hear from the recipient soon. The language used here is informal ("thanks" and "hope to read from you soon") and there are two periods at the end of the sentence. THe email closes with "Regards," then
"ROBERT S. MUELLER, III
DIRECTOR, FEDERAL BUREAU OF INFORMATION
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
WASHINGTON, D.C. 2053 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE" (all in capital letters)

There are also grammar errors in this - add capitalization and punctuation (lack of periods, double periods, run-on sentences). In the section titled "CONTACT INFORMATION" under the first paragraph, the three fields of information given about Mr. Kelvin Williams is :
"NAME
EMAIL
Telephone (not all of this word is in capital letters like the other words)"
THis differs from the fields of information the recipient is asked to provide (FULL NAMEand "TELL" instead of "Telephone")

This email conveys a sense of urgency, like the first email, only it also conveys a sense of mistake - that it was intended for another person but the actual recipient received it by mistake. The vagueness (unspecified "investigation", very short exposition) of the email promotes this feeling of "accidentalness" - it seems to indicate that the details of the transaction/payment and investigation are already known by the intended recipient. It allows the recipient to feel that he has all the necessary means for procuring the payment intended for another.

Analysis

Use of Appeals Approach

Dixon Email
He immediately identifies/allows for the unexpected surprise of the message to his reader. He then asks the reader to consider the "facts and details," which are implied as being present in the email. He then explains that he found the reader's email address through an online directory while searching for "reliable and reputable persons." This is an attempt to make himself appear 'reliable and reputable' because those character qualities are said to be important to him in others. He is directly soliciting the readers' favor and time (that is needed for them to finish reading the email) in a polite wording, "I humbly ask that you take due consideration of its importance..."

Later in the first paragraph, he further asks readers to read the email with "all seriousness of purpose devoid of any doubt...because this deal is based on Trust, Confidentiality, and Sincerity of Purpose in order to have an Acceptable meeting of the minds." In this sentence, he is asking the reader to suspend doubt until he he has finished reading the email because the goal of the "deal" is an "Acceptable meeting of the minds." Even though the deal has never been mentioned before, no explanation is given beyond its stated goal. In saying the deal is based on "Trust, Confidentiality, and Sincerity of Purpose," and because he is the sole instigator of this "deal," Dixon is implicitly saying that he is one who can be trusted, who has confidentiality, and sincerity of purpose.

He then claims to be a "person of integrity," further trying to reinforce the idea that he is honest and trustworthy. He gives his name only after he has said this.

After explaining his client's accident, he details how he has tried to find the client's relatives. This is a definite appeal to ethos. He is presenting his work as being extensive - he gives no other option for finding the relatives besides what he has already done. Then he presents his contacting the reader as being so "we can work together in repatriating" his late client's band account.

Without any explanation, he simply shifts from "Barrister Dixon" trying to find his late client's beneficiary, to suddenly taking part in depleting the client's fund with the help of the email reader. This strategy of partnership with little or no explanation of the partnering both makes readers curious to keep reading while hoping they will soon find explanation, and it attempts to create a bond of familiarity and a sense of co-conspiracy between the reader and Dixon.

He further tries to create a sense of co-conspiracy/teamwork/identification by asking for the reader's consent and promising a 50/50 split of the money. He also tries to indicate his good will towards the reader by guaranteeing that all this will be "executed" (implicitly stated as being executed by himself) under legitimate arrangements to protect them from the law.

Next, he indicates his preparedness and legal abilities, in an attempt to demonstrate that he is capable of protecting the reader, by then assuring the reader that he has all the paperwork done, he is the sole attorney in the case, and that he knows the supposed "international law of inheritance" which gives him the appearance of knowing what he is talking about, which would build readers' trust in him. He is also trying to appear intelligent by throwing the specific law title out there.

Finally, he presents the "success" of the transaction as complete, only lacking the reader's "honest" cooperation. This again is his implicit statement that because he wants honesty/integrity in people, he is an honest person himself. (It is highly ironic then that he is not only acting illegally and falsely by trying to present one person as another, but he is also asking for "honestly" in being dishonest!)

The lack of last name (for the email recipient or the client) hinders ethos because it appears to be either something enabling the email's mass mailing, or an oversight of an important detail (which, for a lawyer, is fatal because careful attention to detail is essential).

Pathos:

An emotional appeal is made most strongly in the second paragraph when he details the accident of his late client. Although this is odd because the readers are being made to feel sadness and sympathy for the dead client/family while later being asked to fraudulently take their money. Yet, by making it clear that they have no surviving relations (that could be found), it does not seem like such a fraud since it is presented that no one is being cheated except the cold, greedy Financial House. Frequent appeals are made to readers' good character (integrity, honesty, etc).

There is also an underlying sense of urgency created in the email. I think this sets readers in an emotional state in which they feel obligated to respond to whatever they are being asked to do. This is dependent on the ethos the emailer establishes, however. Without ethos, the readers will not take seriously any urgent call to action.

Logos:
there is not much use of logos in this email - just the attempt to convince readers of the validity of what he is claiming and why they would be smart to do what he asks. His argument runs :
His client and client's only family died
He cannot find other relatives
He has looked extensively
The bank will confiscate the funds if relative not found in ten days
Because reader shares same name as client, he may pose as heir, split the money with the barrister
The barrister already has paperwork in order, and will arrange all so no "breach" of the law will occur, and the reader will be protected
The reader only has to give his consent and he and barrister will both get paid

Mueller Email

Ethos:
The salutation ("compliments of the day") attempts to make the emailer appear good-natured, kind, and professional by his observation of polite formalities. He uses language such as 'I wish to," "please be informed," "we do await," that appears to be imitating formalities, and trying to show politeness toward readers. Yet the formality is not consistent - ending "thanks" and "Regards," are not formal letter closings.

Ethos is also attempted to establish by the formal "Contact Info" as this seems to support the credibility of both Williams and Mueller (minus the fact that "Info" is not consistent with the professional formal approach). It is an attempt to use the strategy of identification with readers - "I'll give you something, you give me something in return."

The entire email is attempting to present the situation as beneficial to the reader - how they are doing the reader a favor by releasing their payment and all they ask in return is the reader's contact details.

Pathos: I couldn't find any direct appeals to pathos.
Logos: The line of argument runs thus:
The reader's payment is ready (amount of payment and reason for payment never specified )
All the reader needs to do is provide contact information
If they provide the contact information, and provide $110, the United States Dept. of Justice will send the payment on an "ATM Swift Card" through the FedEx International Courier Service.

The argument implicitly leads readers to believe that the payment they will receive will be more than the $110 the readers must pay for its delivery.
There are no comments on this page.
Valid XHTML :: Valid CSS: :: Powered by WikkaWiki