A Comparison of Two Media Texts Essay

Animals very rarely serve as models for the human body. Many people are brought up with the idea that animal experimentation is necessary to insure the safety of humans, but in reality, these experiments are creating only harm to animals. Animals have done nothing to deserve this backlash, and by educating the public on the true unsuccessfulness of animal testing, the ethical side is forced out in the open. The argument ‘Animal Testing is Bad Science’ by the People for The Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), argues that ethics dictate the value of each life, and that no life is overthrown by another. This well formulated argument effectively integrates ethos, logos, powerful structure, and robust premises to persuade the audience.

New England Anti-Vivisection Society’s article displays the facts on how animal testing does not work. Presenting the horrendous cruelty of animal testing methods and the realities of the reliability of the experimentation, the article shows the lack of compatibility between animals and humans. Neavs’s writing shows that testing on animals does not guarantee results in humans. Neavs is reliable and useful because it cites it’s facts to various other sources. Neavs is trying to help end animal cruelty of all forms by providing information about suffering animals and telling people how to get involved or to just donate so the society itself can help the cause more. Using the examples of cruelty and instances of incompatibility between humans

Without medicines people could not be able to live. New cures are needed to solve illnesses that for now are incurable. So all that suffering and killing of animals is justified to help other lives. Source A, shows on the left-hand side an image of a rat and on the right-hand side the image of a girl, and in the middle there is a question that is used to involve the audience and to make them think, which says: “Who would you rather see live?” The picture is also playing with the word rather, that, divided in half, is rat and her.

The reader is presented with the stories of different adults who grew up as orphans and were able to create a better life for themselves with the help of this nonprofit organization. The article does an excellent job in describing the feelings these adults felt as they grew up; it explains the hidden aspects of the lives of these orphans that we fail to acknowledge. The content provided in this article was useful, because it sets an example of all the things a nonprofit organization can do. It also explains how the beneficiaries feel before and after they are helped. This is a different kind of information, however it is an example of what I could try to imitate. The article is a news article, I consider it reliable. I also consider the article to have been biased towards their Vocational training program. The article fits my research by providing me with an example of what I should try to imitate. It was helpful because it showed me the various ways orphans beneficiate from nonprofit organizations around the world; and to think some kids could benefit from something I start is an amazing inspiration. The article definitely shaped my argument because it is proof that what my senior project looks to accomplish, is something that will be

As we discover treatments for diseases such as rabies, feline leukemia, tetanus, anthrax, and much more, animals also bear the advantage of protection. In fact, humans share hundreds of diseases with animals. We also share similar organs allowing scientists to use animals as an essential model for the study of illnesses. Therefore, the work researchers perform sets a platform for an end result where both parties benefit. It can thus be concluded that those against animal research are covered by a counterintuitive notion because, without animal research, the animals whom they are fighting for would die due to a potentially curable disease. To deal with the ethical dilemma of animal research, countries like the United Kingdom have placed regulations that require the research scientists to show how and if they have considered alternative ways before they are given a license to continue with their research projects. Given these circumstances, we can conclude that the rise in animals used in research must mean that in the near future there may be major medical

How can Dogs Make You Happier, or is it healthier? That is the first difference between a media article and the scientific article. While the media article created from the scientific report, small differences are put into place that infers different conclusions. In reading the scientific article, the reader is always aware of strong correlation but is also cognizant that proof of dogs improving human health is not available. In reading the media article it is inferred that the theory has been proved. Seeing the difference between the two pieces has given me a heightened sense of awareness and skepticism in what media articles are delivering as truth.

Animal Research has become a heated debate over the past few decades, reaching a high point around the end of the twentieth century yet it still continues through today. There are two main ways to look at this topic: the logos pro side and the pathos anti side. Those who are for animal testing realize the amazing benefits that can come out of such research while those against animal testing stand up for animals’ rights and try to find ways to better such research without killing so many innocent, defenseless animals. While both sides seem to carry their argument well, those against animal testing ruin their ethos by making their argument an emotional one while those who are for animal testing build

Many people have animals around the world, whether it be dogs, cats, reptiles, birds, even horses and llamas, and they all love them very much. A lot of people will do anything to ensure the comfort and safety of their companion and friend. Many people may be shocked and horrified to find that over 100 Million animals die each year due to animal testing. This essay will go into more detail about some reasons why people might find animal testing wrong, and some reasons why a lot of people see it as a good thing. While most believe that animal testing is important for medical research, some people think it is wrong because it’s been shown that less than 8% of all animal test results actually contain profitable data and that over 100 million

The first article is a new article written by BBC. The article they wrote is not rhetorically effective because of all the missing components. The BBC article is written in the organizational method of narration. The method of organization is extremely obvious since the author is not making any connection with the audience just stating facts. BBC states in their article, "Diana, Princess of Wales, has died after a car crash in Paris" (BBC np). The author is too formal and does not give any emotion throughout the paper. Since the connection with the audience is lacking, part of the rhetorical triangle is missing making the article ineffective. The audience part of the triangle relates to pathos, and since the thought of audience is missing from the article pathos is not present. Despite the fact many things are missing in the article, logos and ethos are present. BBC establishes ethos because they are a new station, and people trust the news and what they say. Logos is established through the article because the wording is very straightforward in delivering facts about the

Animal testing is a horrible event that occurs worldwide, killing and deforming millions of animals each year. (Pathos/Anger + Amplification) Animal testing is a monstrosity, which is done by monsters. (Aphorism) Testing on animals is unnecessary, cruel and unreliable (Thesis + Understatement). Mice, rats, primates and even cats and dogs are forced to live in cold, dark cages. Having these animals secluded in small cages is like having humans sit in a small room without any contact with the outside world, only allowed to sit there and stare at the wall for hours on end. (Simile) These animals are used to develop treatments, determine toxicity

The newspaper article “Damning report finds many NHS staff lack the ability and compassion to do their job” (Daily Mail, 10th January, 2012) was published by Leon Watson. According to News Trust (2014) the Daily Mail newspaper is the oldest tabloid and also a British paper which was first published in 1896. News Trust, (2014) also explains that the Daily Mail is Britain 's second wealthiest newspaper soon after The Sun. Since this newspaper was published 3 years ago, it carries some form of currency as it is quite recent and according to News Trust, (2014) it is a reliable source with relevant up to date information. However, Bidgood, Lunt & Joliffe (2013) explains that it can be very hard for a student to critique a newspaper article because they normally provide minimal information about the study and therefore this becomes hypothetical instead of being based on the actual facts.

In this compare and contrast essay I will be comparing and contrasting human testing vs. Animal testing I understand the need for animals to be tested on some science projects putting a mouse in a trap to see if he'll find the cheese but testing vaccines on them but if you tested vaccines on humans I don't think you're going to be proud of you know every single day with 15 different needles to see if you get sick or what kind of allergic reaction you would have. Say that animals are people too you know animals are your best friends I know my animals are my best friends I don't think you really want to think of your best friends mom or dad getting probe you with a needle to see if so let's see what allergic reaction they have animals sadly do

The debate on whether animal testing should continue revolves around the morality of testing animals. It is understood that “[m]ost people agree that animals have at least some moral status – that is why it is wrong to abuse pets or needlessly hurt other animals”(Liou 2010). What debaters argue about is whether animals have a moral status that is paramount to that of humans; such as the capacity to suffer and to enjoy life. This is a topic discussed in “Consider the Lobster,” in which the author discusses whether or not the lobsters feel pain when being cooked (Wallace 60). It was found that “[s]upporters of this type of argument [, those who think that the two moral statuses are paramount,] frequently claim that granting animals less moral

A Comparison of Two Newspaper Articles In this essay I will be comparing two articles taken from local

Text A, a transcript from a British radio station, is discussing how people should be more cautious about hurting endangered species especially dolphins appealing to environmentalist and listeners of the radio station. Meanwhile Text B, an entry from Encyclopedia Britannica, is informing Environmentalist and humans in general about the destruction of the environments and animals caused by humans. Both authors use the overall purpose to attract the same audience is similar in both articles, but the articles differ in overall diction, syntax, tone, and several other textual features.