“Much as we might want to understand animals at a level deeper than pop culture, we can only understand them in terms of our own experiences, language and emotions, and interpreted within our social, historical and cultural contexts. The only way we have of understanding animals is to recognize that ‘when we gaze at animals we hold up a mirror to ourselves’ (Corbett, 176). Animal messages are brought to us by the pop culture industry, whose job it is to create, disseminate, and sell meaning. In most cases, they aren’t selling you a moose, but what a moose means to you for example – the characteristics and qualities that you and most people associate with the species. Based on common meanings presented to us from an early age, animals are …show more content…
Television advertising has basically become a “virtual zoo” that features a very wide variety of what humans might call ‘corporate spokesanimals’ or ‘spokescreatures’ so to speak. If you think about some of the most famous ‘spokescreatures’ that you see on TV what comes to your mind? I’ll tell you what comes to my mind: The Energizer Bunny that just keeps on going; the GEICO gecko that promises to save you 15 percent on your car insurance; the AFLAC duck that never can get anyone’s attention; the Planters’ Peanut, looking as sophisticated as ever with his top hat, spectacles and cane; Tony the Tiger emphasizing – THEY’REEEE GREATTT! There is something very clever to be said about a corporation that uses an animal to talk to its prospects, but are we really sure what that is? Are we sure what to say about a society that listens, and responds to spokescreatures?. Perhaps we find them more credible than spokespersons. Advertisers have long used animals to symbolize certain qualities in their products and services. And as we have learned in this class, the newest trend, particularly in television advertising, animals are being given certain “personalities” that use humor to sell goods outside the realm of say just pet products. One of the reasons for this, in my opinion, is for the simple fact that people can turn people off, but who wouldn’t pay attention to an adorable mutt or a monkey? A lot of times, animals (I feel) are a subtle
In the article “A Change of Heart about Animals” (1 September 2003), published by Los Angeles Times, author Jeremy Rifkin discusses how “... researchers are finding [is] that many of our fellow creatures are more like us than we imagined.” (Rifkin 61). Using academic diction, Rifkin develops his main idea with evidence such as “They [animals] feel pain, suffer, and experience stress, affection, excitement, and even love -- and these findings are changing how we view animals. ”(Rifkin 61). This suggests a pathos and logos persuasive appeal that broadens the reader’s understanding and knowledge in changing our perspective of the inhumane and inequality treatment that non domestic animals receive. Rifkin’s use of pathos and logos appeals is to
In 2010 the ASPCA (The American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals) came out with a commercial that would shock the advertisement industry. The effectiveness of this commercial is proven, simply by watching the reactions of the commercial’s viewers. For those who have never seen the video it has a very sad and morose tone to it. The commercial begins with showing pictures and videos of suffering animals with the song “Angel” playing in the background. While this is going on the narrator of the commercial (Sarah McLachlen) is softly talking about the suffering and abuse that these unfortunate animals go through. Through many different rhetorical techniques the viewers are many times brought to tears after watching this
Is it ethical for animals to have the same rights as humans? During this paper I will present the views of both sides. I will try my best to give the reader a chance to come to there own unbiased conclusion. I will talk about the key areas of animal ethics. I will present the facts and reasoning behind the arguments over Animal cruelty, testing, hunting, and improper housing. My conclusion will hopefully bring us closer to answering many of the question surrounding “Animal Rights and Ethics”.
For this essay I will be using the commercial made by Budweiser for the 2015 Super Bowl, “Lost Dog.” This advertisement is about a tiny lost puppy getting far away from home and most importantly, the friendship between this puppy and some Clydesdale horses. In the beginning of this commercial, the puppy is shown hiding under some hay, and then he proceeds to jump into a random trailer which initially gets him lost far from home. There is no dialogue in this commercial aside from the music in the background, but the advertisement shows the distress of the owner through facial expressions and scenes where he puts
Doesn’t it kill you to see a movie and see an animal get killed or just hurt in it? Good thing that’s all special effects. Back in the day, around 1966, movies didn’t always use special effects. Khartoum, a movie based on a holy war in the Sudan desert, directed by Basil Dearden and Eliot Elisofon, used horses a great deal, but did not use the special effects in order to not hurt the animals. Many horses died in the making of this movie, as well as others, even including a major hit, Ben-Hur. Today, there are many activist groups that fight for and about the unfair treatment and protection for animals in everyday life. The People for Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) is one of these groups. PETA was founded in
According to Gallup.com a third of Americans want animals to have the same rights as people. The Animal Bill of Right implies that animals have the right to be free from exploitation and cruelty, It also prohibits laboratory animals to be used for research. Animals will also have healthy diets and medical care. It will also provide them with an environment that satisfies their needs. I do not believe we need a Bill of Rights for animals. This would not only be extreme but it will affect human culture, medical research, and cost of food
Advertisers all have one goal in common, that is an ad that is catching to a consumer’s attention. In today’s fast paced society there are so many selling products and charities. As I exam the advertisement for the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty for Animals (ASPCA), I will show how they use the pathos, ethos, and logos – also known as Aristotle’s Theory of Persuasion.
Throughout history, humans have utilized nonhuman animals for the benefit of mankind. This tendency increased as civilization developed, and presently, necessitated by staggering population growth and technological progress, human use of animals has skyrocketed. We eat them, we breed them, we use them as test subjects. Some people have begun to question the ethics of it all, sparking a debate on animal treatment and whether or not they have rights. In a paper on the subject, Carl Cohen lays out his definition of rights, explains their relationship with obligations, and uses these ideas to present the argument that manifests clearly in his piece’s title, “Why Animals Have No Rights”. THESIS
The commercial appeals to the audience’s pathos more than anything. Animals, especially dogs, have a way of pulling with human heartstrings. “...they can be used to transfer desired meanings to the products with which they are associated” (Phillips 1). In other words, using animals in advertisements can link advertised products to the feelings that are associated
In the world today, media is one of the major ways that companies and businesses sell or inform the society about their products. Television specifically uses commercials to get the attention of their audience by using language, sound, visuals, and persuasive strategies. The commercial, “A Boy and His Dog Duck,” was created by the company IAMS. This commercial is meant to persuade their target audience into buying IAMS food for not only one stage of their animal’s life, but for all stages of its life. The commercial that IAMS created, is quite effective for middle-class new mothers wanting their children to have a long-term companion.
Today, the discussions about the protection of the animal’s rights have received the attention of many people, many countries in the world. A lot of actions have been made by animal right activists to influence the world. Alex Epstein and Yaron Book, both authors of the “The Evil of Animal ‘Right’,” argue animal right activists use too much violence on their action, which is considered going against the law. Then, the authors give a lot of evidence to prove testing animals are extinct, but using animals for testing gives us new vaccines which make our lives better. Without animals for testing, how can scientists find out the vaccine for diseases? Animal right groups are making many effects to Huntingdon Life Sciences.
Catholic views on animal abuse is varied greatly. The ‘traditional’ view is that humans are made in a different image than animals. It proclaims that humans have been given ‘dominion’ over nature, meaning humans can use animals in accordance to their own needs (gen 1:28). However, many Catholics disagree and believe that God gave human ‘stewardship’ over the animals, which means we are put on this Earth to look after and care for God’s creation (Luke 12:6). There are a number of Catholic authorities that discourage animal abuse;
Why is it that we as a society condemn the actions of a man against a man but very rarely a man against an animal? I think this question must be understood if we are ever to change the rights animals have. As of yet I don't believe animals have any actual rights. Rather humans have rights that involve animals. If we are to truly allow animals to have rights the same or similar to humans then we must first define what it is that makes us feel as if they are entitled to rights.
backs and they were dragging their hind legs (Reed 38). While in the lab, the
third world. Singer feels that since the people of the third world are so far