Hi there Joezerb,
I am no English teacher, nor am I 'Raw 50 material' so please take my feedback with a grain of salt.
Overall, I think that it is a pretty solid piece. All of the necessary elements were present in the introduction, and the analysis (which is probably the most important element) was respectable.
Areas for improvement:
Formality - Some phrases could have been worded better (e.g. "the use of statistics like how...", "like this example where" or "so by backing up). Unless you are using it as a verb (synonymous with appreciate), I would try to steer away from the word 'like'.
Diversity of language - In a text response, I try to swap between my analytical verbs, to ensure that I don't repeat myself (e.g. insinuate, imply, suggest, hint). The same can be said for your piece. While it isn't imperative to change, you have used the word 'can' 11 times, 'may' 5 times, 'could' 1 time and 'might' 0, which can seem a little repetitive, disrupting the fluency of the piece.
Range of techniques - I didn't actually read the article, and I also understand that sometimes, the article isn't very forgiving. However, I noticed that you used a couple of statistics and 'appeal to emotions'. This, of course, is fine, but appeals are often quite vague, and I would only really use them if there is nothing better.
I hope that this helps. If not, maybe try asking your teacher for help.