In “Small Change: Why the Revolution Will Not Be Tweeted” by Malcolm Gladwell you asked us to argue which method he used more effectively, logos, ethos, or pathos. In my personal opinion from the context of what I read I feel as though he used a fair amount of all three. I say this because he uses logos to explain things that have happened in the past and how they impacted things in today’s similar occurrences. He states “The things that King needed in Birmingham- discipline and strategy—were things that online social media cannot provide.” This statement alone shows both logos and pathos. Pathos is used when he is telling the stories about the times like the students at the sit-in and how it effected them and using their statements; “I suppose if anyone had come up behind me and yelled ‘Boo,’ I think I would have fallen off my seat.” And last but not least I feel as though the way ethos is used is by being able to use previously told stories and examples such as one written by Clay Shirky about a lost cell phone and how he argues pre-internet that would have never happened. All in all I feel as though the author used a nice relevance of all three skills coherently.