One of the conclusions that I came to through my previous knowledge and active reading is that without hard evidence, quotes or personal experience, public documents can fall short of their intended meaning. Although some documents may be able to stand alone without evidence, for people to believe it is a credible source without it.
The document that I chose to read was the First Things First 2000. The purpose of the document was to renew an earlier manifesto of 1964 where 22 visual designers and communicators called for the skills of visual designers be put to good use and not advertise/ convince customers to purchase unnecessary products. What I found effective about the document was it's use of ethos and emotional appeal. I found this in the lines "Many of us have grown increasingly uncomfortable with this view of design. Designers who devote their efforts primarily to advertising, marketing and brand development and supporting, and implicitly endorsing, a mental environment so saturated with commercial messages that it is changing the very way citizen-customers speak, think, feel, respond and interact." The reason why this is effective because it makes us rethink what we have seen and feel for the designers as no one wants big brother constantly watching and controlling our lives. The evidence that they use to support this claim is the first hand accounts of graphic designers and how they personally feel about the situation they are in. The writing is at the best at the end of the second paragraph which basically summarizes the work as a whole. "The profession's time and energy is used up manufacturing demand for things that are inessential at best."