We decided to watch Food Inc, directed by Robert Kenner, because it dealt with the different aspects of the food industry just like Fast Food Nation by Eric Scholosser. I felt that Food Inc had a more convincing argument because they said theirs more directly. "Consumers have the power to change the food industry," is the argument that is made in Food Inc. Although, like Fast Food Nation, the argument was stated at the end, the background that they put in the beginning of the movie made it more convincing. Fast Food Nation made the subtle argument about the ways that the Fast Food industry is corrupt or blanketing themselves from the world. From both the movie and the book, I took away that many food industries try to cover up their misconducts with pretty packages, a good message, and the bang-wagon type of attitude in advertisements.
I would not have believed their message if they did not have ethos. The book had ethos with all the detailed background of people in the fast food industry. The movie appealed to ethos by the interview they had with farmers that worked to the large monopoly companies. The people interviewed could tell what it was like to have the high demand that the large companies were looking for. I thought they seemed most credible when they would state all the crude deeds that the companies did and they the companies would not do an interview. They probably did not want anything that could hurt their "perfect" image that they were trying so hard to keep.
Logos makes their arguments more powerful. The author includes many facts and statistics that can back up his claims such as, "The popular outrage inspired by The Jungle led Congress to enact food safety legislation in 1906," on page 153. Without this fact the reader would not know why the gruesome events that still exist in the meat packing industry was so bad.The movie had a similar appeal to logos. They stated that 1 in 3 people will develop diabetes and 1 in 2 minorities will develop diabetes because of the salt, fat, sugar diet that we are all so accustom to. It makes me want to change; There is logical reason to. If we all stopped eating the junky food and started eating the healthy food, industries would be obligated to change because of supply and demand.
Pathos + imagery was the strongest appeal. In the book Mr. Scholosser would describe people getting parts of themselves cut off. His most convincing story was Kenny. He went through damaging affects to his body, needed several surgeries, and always pushed for the best within the Monfort company. Once he could not work any more, they did not care for him at all. Reading this made me feel that these industries need to fix what they are doing. In the movie it was Kevin. He died from E. Coli from a burger that he ate. The company that made that did not anything to the grieving family. Seeing the image of the cute and innocent little boy being condemned by a hamburger he ate was terrible to hear. With these examples from both the book and the movie, it goes to so the audience that their is not ethical ways going on in most companies that have a market within the fast food industry. Their arguments are made convincing by the shocking visual images, detailed backgrounds, statistics, animal abuse, and the stories of the innocent being mistreated. A lot of food companies goals are "faster, fatter, bigger cheaper." I think that this is not the best way of doing business. If I am purchasing something that has abused workers or mass slaughtered animals behind it, I want to know about it. Food Inc and Fast Food Nation showed me that, "you can't judge a book by its cover," it is more than that. One must look beyond the deceitful packaging.
No comments:
Post a Comment