# Authors Note
The purpose of this author’s note is to reflect on my rhetorical analysis and its effectiveness at analyzing and comparing the two websites rhetorical strategies and how well they persuade the reader to agree with their argument and the process of writing this essay.
The structure of this essay was familiar to me as I have written similar essays in the past both for assignments and exams and have spent a long time learning about rhetorical devices and analyses. The most challenging part of writing this essay was going through the websites and picking out the rhetorical devices and strategies rather than having everything written out in front of me like when analyzing a single or a few texts, as websites have many different parts that you can visit.
The main materials that I used from class to help with my analysis were the slides that had the definitions and examples of rhetorical devices and strategies, which gave me a good idea of what to look for when analyzing the websites. I approached the websites I wanted to analyze by keeping in mind the argument that they were trying to make and their intended audience and looking for where they are trying to support that argument or persuade people and looking for rhetorical devices and strategies in those areas, and then analyzing them.
Overall, I feel very confident in the accuracy and effectiveness of my analysis. The website for the National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition is designed with the very purpose of persuading people whereas the website for the Minnesota Institute for Sustainable Agriculture is designed for research, education, and information sharing. That fact makes me very confident in my conclusion that the former website is more persuasive than the latter website. The only thing I have doubts about is there only being logos and ethos. There could be instances where pathos is used in the website, though I doubt it would have any effect on its persuasiveness in comparison to the other website.