Final answer:
Krimsky utilizes a well-structured essay to convincingly argue for the necessity of free media in a democracy, incorporating both logical and emotional appeals and carefully refuting counterclaims.
Step-by-step explanation:
Krimsky structures his essay to persuade readers about the importance of a free media within a democracy by meticulously refuting counterclaims and using a blend of logical and emotional appeals. This structure underscores Krimsky's fairness and adeptness in argumentation, pointing to his awareness of the rhetorical situation. The essay moves from the introduction, which lays the groundwork for the argument, to the body where Krimsky supports his thesis through various rhetorical strategies. This includes using quotations, paraphrases, examples, and analogies, as well as addressing counterarguments to reinforce his stance.
The effectiveness of Krimsky's structured approach is in its architectural soundness—like carefully constructing a building, he lays down foundational evidence, inserts strong supporting beams, and encloses his argument with persuasive walls. This method is not only logical but also tells a story that guides the reader to an inevitable conclusion about the pivotal role of media criticism in democracy. Krimsky's paper shows an intentional attempt to meet or challenge conventional expectations in rhetorically effective ways, allowing for a robust analysis and demonstration of critical thinking.