in that. Writing is an art as much as a science. The factual errors have been highlighted already, so I'll stick to the lack of critical thinking and the anecdotal evidence:
Critical thinking:
Having a "hillbilly" working in a mill as the last image in a commercial as the representative of what Mississippi State is all about is absurd. A political science professor should understand what a Mississippi hillbilly represents to the rest of the nation. Anyone viewing such a commercial will probably not think, "Oh the noble Mississippi farmer who rises with the sun to toil on the land and feed the masses!" People would think, "There's an uneducated, racist, ignorant yokel." It's not hard to arrive at this conclusion.
Anecdotal evidence: He uses the example of the drunken frat boy in the Grove mooing at State fans as an example of how much different State is from Ole Miss. This is lazy writing relying on stereotypes to emphasize a point. Anecdotal evidence is weak, weak, weak.
Finally, the author writes that the people of State are honorable, good, and true and they "do what Jesus said to do." This after clearly stating that the people of Ole Miss are not like the people of State. This is an appeal to raw emotion and the sentiment that "we are really better than them...we are honorable and good and true and we do what Jesus says." These are glittering generalities that cannot be proven.
So, yes, it is an awful example of a persuasive essay. I know nothing about the man who wrote it, but the piece of writing is poor. He might be the greatest professor in the world, but he's an awful writer. He might be the second coming of F. Lee Bailey, but he's a terrible writer. He might have been the smartest guy in the history of Millsaps, but he's a terrible writer.
There's no way around it. Any English teacher in America will tell you that this article is crap.
