Analysis of an Ad

first reading:
1. er, I think the main idea is about advertising.
2. the writer is trying to say that advertising agencies use celebs to help zero in on their target market.

second reading:
1. it is not effective in introducing the topic. I am still a little confused as to what the main topic is.
2. The thesis statement is, " In our modern world of today, Americans see thousands of advertisments every year, we buy many products because of ads."
3. no, the writer does not stay on topic. I'm not sure if the main topic is advertising, Andy or milk.
4. The paragraphs seem to be all over the place and they don't complete a full thought.
5. I want to know more about the ad agencies, statistic, ratio to ads vs. sells etc.
6. Things were quoted properly and did fit in the right context of the paper.

third reading
1.They are talking to the american population. The writer assumes every one knows who Andy Roddick and Stone Cold Steve Austin are.
2. No, I am not engaged at all. The writers style is kind of tinie-bopper-ish, if that makes sence.
3. The tone is consistent throught out the entire draft. I don' think the tone is appropriate for the audience. It was too young. Definitely should not have said, "He has a kind of sexy pose too" I get that she? was saying that the advertising agency likes attractive people for their adds, but by saying that she is adding her own comment, which I didn't appreciate for this paper.

1. The writer is good at having a lot of different topic to draw from with in one paper.
2. With all those topics she should have elaborated more on them, and made the paper flow from one topic to the next, so I could understand more clearly, what she is trying to say.