Rhetoric: the art of effective communication (writing and speaking)
Analysis:
1. the separating of any material or abstract entity into its constituent elements (opposed to synthesis ).
2. this process as a method of studying the nature of something or of determining its essential features and their relations: the grammatical analysis of a sentence.
3. a presentation, usually in writing, of the results of this process: The paper published an analysis of the political situation. [Thank YOU www.dictionary.com!]
Assignment: Is Morgan Spurlock's argument convincing? Analyze and discuss how Spurlock uses rhetorical elements to make (or break) his point.
Remember: rhetorical elements (i.e. speaker, message, audience, appeals, etc.)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
I believe that is argiment was convincing although somewhat juvenile. His purpose for this expiriment was to see if a person could be physically harmed my McDonalds foods and if the claims made were relivent. he went on a 30day trial of which he would eat McDonalds for all 3 meals and would supersize if asked. The juvenile aspect of his appeal was that he took it rather mockingly in the beginning. You could tell this by his tone and speech, such as when he would say things such as the Mcgurgles and would make it seem as though he could never be addicted to such a thing. This also abolished his etho's and partically killed his logos. Logicially other than the mocking, he made good points in his case such as when he mentiond the fatest state in america(mississippi) and if things continue 1 in 3 children will have diebetes. I believe that the pictures showed in between chapters and interviews were completely biased for and expiriment that was meant to be unbiased. He could have done more to discuss the qualities behind the business such as the ronald Mcdonald house's that house hospitalized children and thier families. Morgan Spurlock soon became addicted himself to the hings that he was mocking you can tell he is enjoying the food at the midpoint and he admits it at the point of addiction. i believe that the audience was both those who are overwieght and those who are not. but as displayed during the seminar (2/23/09 period 2) that the majority of the class wanted to each McDonalds after watching this video where as I wanted never to see a burger or fry again and parfiat has a new picture to me. this does prove that the video will affect some people but the majority will just "eat in moderation." a major appeal to not eating as much McDonalds was how fast he was gaining wait, and the health hazard that came about in a month. some of the others were the way that the foods brake down with a major amount of bacteria or no brake down at all, both of which are harmful to the body when comsumed at high levels. as Spurlock stated the average houshold eats out 4 out of 10 meals. some of the other problems with the majo publicity of the fast food industry is that children are so much more expose (around 2,000 ad's a day) that they are more familiar with fast food icons than educational and historical figureheads. McDonalds
spends about 1.4 million on media advertising a year. things such as this limit the parents influence on thier own children by making it seem like so many other things are true; so why cant they have?
Spurlock was asked to supersize was asked to supersized 9 times and 5 of those 9 were in texas. texas has 5 of the fatest cities in the world. 24% of McDonalds customer are super heavy users. much of the world is addicted to the golden arches and they use this to thier advantage and even have the audacity to mock it my calling thier customers heavy and superheavy users. they use thier clients addictions to thier advantage and were and are aware of the fact that they are and were addicted threw the fact they call thier clients "users." this in my opinion decintigrates the logos, ethos, and pathos of the McDonalds industry and thier only saving grace is the fact that they have the Ronald McDonald house and that still kills thier pathos and ethos in reality becuase they use it only for publicity and they advertise thier house's about 4 times a year when they are having thier fundaraiser which tells me that they most likely so not even give a percent of the monthly wages to the house at all.
christen valentine
spurlock gives you a great example of how fast-food eating is a life threating and dangerous way of ending your single life. I felt as if he did that by exageerating the the ordeal by ordering so much much food and eating it breakfast, lunch and dinner. Fast-food is not bad only when being consumed at such a rate that he ate it.
Spurlock used alot of his time and money to show people what they already know. People know it's bad for you but the fact is that it tastes good and people understand what there putting into their bodies. This movie will not change that. Spurlock just wanted his 15 minutes of fame... Well he got it, but he also got fat and unhealthy while doing it, he may of lost that weight but he still will never get that healthy again.
Because of the extremity of Spurlocks Mc Diet we don't actually see how harmful eating these types of food are because, the average person according to mc donalds only eats at their establishment twice a month. So by eating it 3 times a day 7 days a week for a month. If he would of eaten mc donalds once a day i feel that results would have been better moderated, and more reasonable. And the fact that people blame corporations for their problems. If you can't control your cravings or if you can't excercise your free will to make decisions maybe you should be under the care of a health professional honsetly..The law suits that these 2 teenagers bring about are absolutley ridiculous honestly if you are over weight it is either because of an unfortunate gene pool, a medical reason, or you have no self control. Honestly i think thats these two girls sued MCDONALDS IN ORDER TO GET MONEY SO THAT THEY COULD GO GET BARIATRIC SURGERY AND LIPO and other plastic surgery because they were unhappy with their appearance. You know what this is when we need to put our foot down and say enough is enough . Your fat its your fault get over it. Im overweight you dont see me suing McDonalds or Bk or any other place. Just like if your failing a class because you never turn in homework is it the teachers fault you havent turned in your homework?? no though many ignorant teens claim it is it ISNT you make a choice when you go home to either do your homework or to do something else and if YOU CHOOSE something else thats your fault and your free will to choose. Stop acting like you need someone to hold your stupid fat hand. Let it go by suing mcdonalds cause your a fat trick your just embarrassing yourself.
ok well i am a little mad now so i will post later
Brie C
oops wrong topic...
I couldn't print so here is my rhetorical analysis.
Morgan Spurlock’s “Supersize Me” documentary makes a very effective argument against eating fast food. Morgan Spurlock clearly states that the purpose for his fast food binge is so that he can learn for himself and give people a concrete example of what fast food does to your body and how it affects you even when you don't realize it. He uses a documentary as his format. This helps make his case all the more believable because he records the whole process for everyone to see. You don’t simply have to take his word for it but see it for yourself. His documentary is meant to target average Americans who eat fast food. He is also trying to reach the younger generation of teenagers who do not realize what eating fast food is really doing to them. He effectively uses doctors opinions, statistics and his own examples to deliver the message that fast food is bad for you and that Americans need to stop eating it if they want to be healthy. Morgan Spurlock starts off as being very healthy and fit and slowly gains weight, high cholesterol and liver problems. He limits himself to exercising as much as an average American and orders each item on the menu. This helps establish his study as being credible because he is making sure to cover all sides of his argument. The tone of his argument also works to his advantage. He portrays the information as though he is open minded and trying to see both sides. He interviews countless professors, nutrionists and food company representatives. Their aren't a lot of holes in his argument from what I could see except that he isn't eating the amount of fast food that the average American eats. Most Americans do not eat fast food for every meal. However he also addresses this later on in his movie and admits to that but also shows the damaging effects it has on those who eat it less. He also states that there is a large portion of the population that do eat fast food multiple times per week and that is extremely unhealthy. Morgan definitely establishes and uses to his advantage his pathos. When viewers watch him eat and then occasionally barf up the food it makes the viewer feel for him and express disgust at eating fast food. Pathos is definitely one of his strongest uses of argument as he lets viewers watch the whole process. Throughout the video He also uses a lot of Logos in his argument. Statistics flash across the screen constantly. These include crazy nutritional information, obesity statistics, and the information about his own weight gain. Finally he uses Ethos by having multiple examinations by three different doctors. He also consults experts, nutritionists, and professors and asks their opinions on the fast food problem. He is also shown attempting to contact representatives from McDonalds and they do not respond. However that still establishes credibility because he is attempting to get the other side of the story even though it may be tough. Before I saw this movie I was very biased about what I thought it would say. I believed that it would be a video that was unrealistic and not honest. However because of his incredible argument I saw that it made total sense. His arguments are very valid and he truly looked at more than one side of the story. I am now a true believer in not eating fast food. Although it is ultimately our choice in what we eat I think everyone including the fast food companies need to make a change to be healthier. By giving incentives for fast food companies to go healthy we can reverse our obesity problems and make a better world for us all.
So many people are saying that since it was such an extreme diet it really doesn't prove much because nobody would eat like that. Yes, eating it here and there won't make that big of a difference, but the fact that eating it for every meal for 30 days and getting that sick does prove one of his points. Fast food is not good for you and does effect you in a bad way. If this was false he would be fine at the end of the month. His body was completely out of wack, the doctors were completely floored by the results, and he almost didn't last past week 3! How could this not prove harmful effects of fast food? I dont think its right to blame fast food corporations for weight problems though. Their food may be the cause of the extra lbs., but your hand was the cause of the it finding its way to your tummy , not the person who provided it.
i think he proved his point about how much fast food can affect us but no matter how much they say its bad im sure people will still go get something to eat even after watching this. i know did :).
karla torres
Post a Comment