Doran And Bloomberg Persuasion Analysis

Another reason is that the regulation can raise health awareness in the article “sugary drinks over 16 ounce banned in new york city, Board of health votes

When someone is persuaded not on facts but on other cues, ex: attractiveness, sound of voice, persuader has special ‘powers’, etc.

As an attempt to reduce the rising obesity and obesity-related disease rates, Mayor Bloomberg of New York City has proposed a ban on soft drinks larger than 16 oz. According to an infographic created by the Huffington Post, extra large soft drinks have accounted for an average of 301 extra calories in people’s diets across the US. Although measures need to be put into place to improve the unhealthy diets and lifestyles of many Americans, a ban on large soft drinks is not the solution. The ban on soda would be an ineffective attempt at reducing obesity and obesity-related diseases, as well as an infringement of civil liberties and an attack on businesses in New York City.

The ban on larger sodas would only make people buy more than one soda to satisfy their cravings as they do not like being told what they can and can not have. In 2013, in response to the ban, The Daily Signal reported “Mayor Bloomberg and the Board of Health seek to use their power to change consumer behavior. This assumes that citizens are ignorant and must be protected from themselves.” This agrees with the above statement of the people not liking being told what they can and can not do, or have. Another thing people may argue is that the ban is for people to be able to be healthier and still have soda. CNN News reports that “One of those solutions is to control portion size and sugar consumption.” While this is true the ban would only be subjective to places such as movie theaters, sports venues, restaurants, and places that people visit every once in a blue moon. The Huffington Post reports, “It's also important to look at where people acquire such large drinks. … Such neighborhood stores selling over 50 percent food products fall under the jurisdiction of the City's Department of Health, and therefore would be limited by the ban. Those selling under 50 percent food products would be exempt from the ban.” This basically states that convenience stores, supermarkets, and gas stations would not be subjective to the ban so people could just go to one of these places to get larger sodas therefore finding a way around the ban. This subjectiveness of the ban would not only make the ban inefficient but would also cost the city by stores and other places that fall under the jurisdiction of the ban having to cut workers, which then causes the state to have to create more programs for poorer city

In New York City the mayor is trying to ban sugary sodas to decrease the amount of obesity. Two-thirds of adults in New York are overweight, 40% of elementary and middle school students fight obesity. Is this because of the intake of sugary sodas or is it the lack of self control? "Liz Berman, the coalition's chairwoman" states "We are smart enough to make our own decision about what to eat and drink."

Question 1 - In her article Nadia Arumugam acknowledges some of the counter arguments to her own claim. She admits that the ban does not prevent customers from buying two cans of soda if they wanted, it only forbids “food services establishments regulated by the city” to sell sugary drinks exceeding 16 ounces. Through his art, the creator of the cartoon Dave Granlund demonstrates his position on the soda ban by questioning its effectiveness. He would likely disagree with the Nadia Aruguman because if someone wants to drink more than 16 ounces, he can and he will most probably do so.

The first essential of persuasion involves the structure of the argument being posed by one who is trying to provoke others to action. In order to convince someone of a new argument, idea or moral, one must use the proper methods: logos, ethos and pathos. According to Hauser, “The method

1Why has there been so much fuss about New York City’s attempt to impose a soda ban,1 or more precisely, a ban on large-size “sugary drinks”? After all, people can still get as much soda as they want. This isn’t Prohibition. It’s just that getting it would take slightly more effort. So, why is this such a big deal?

* Dr. Cialdini explained that commitments are more powerful when they are active; public; effortful; and viewed as internally motivated. The statement of the commentator is accurate because the motorcycle owners had made their commitment public by tattooing their commitment on their

We can be healthier by doing small things, getting the zero calorie option instead of the regular option. Or if the restaurant owners can afford it they can get one of those cool machines with the option with no sugar or no calories. Yes, soda does have a lot of sugar and calories but so does candy and ice cream. So why are we singling out soda? It’s like saying we can’t have soda at school because it has too much sugar but we can have as much M&M chocolate chip cookies as we like. That has just about the same health benefits to soda. If the government want kids to be healthy instead of putting more taxes on the soda they should just trust the parents to limit the kids. So instead of taxing the soda, the government should just only let restaurants sell small cups like a 5 ounce instead of a 15-ounce cup. Adults should also be mature enough to know the limits. If too many people stop drinking soda the soda companies will completely go out of business. Even the government and all the people who want to add taxes to soda think they want soda completely eliminated, but every once and awhile is okay to get a can of soda. But if the government completely takes out soda, there would be no” Let’s go get some soda to replenish our minds and then we can think again.” People could also walk to the place there and back home if they are talking about healthy. If the government wanted all

The ban limits the size drinks allowed to be sold by certain restaurants Bloomberg states the ban is “simply forcing you to understand”. This means from a technical standpoint the ban makes you understand how much sugar is put into your soda drinks and limits the amount allowed. Mayor Bloomberg states on television that only restaurants regulated by the city will be affected by the ban. This informs the viewer that other establishments such as 7 eleven will still be allowed to sell what ever size drinks they please, and deems the ban useless if walking into 7 eleven allows you to still buy a ‘Big Gulp’ slurpee or soda. The New York City Obesity Task force Plan has 67 pages in total being amendments, public hearings, and a collection of statements “in support of New York City’s limit on size of sugary drinks”. This shows the proposed bans purpose and how the ban can overall greatly aid obesity and assist the problem surrounding sugary sodas and drinks. This supports the humorous tone because Casey Neistat uses phrases such as “what the mayor just mumbled” or humourous music and

According to “New York Soft Drink Size Limit”, recently in New York City the limit on the 16 ounce sugary drinks law passed. As of March 12, 2013, eight members of the New York City council approved this law to prohibit more than 16 ounces per beverage. This encounter to ban soppy drinks is supported by Mayor Michael Bloomberg. The law prohibits, fast food restaurants, movie theaters, sports stadiums, and gas stations to sell sugary drinks

Do you drink soda every day and, especially the ones that are over 16oz? Do you ever think about what soda can do to you over time if you consume too much of it? Soda or any kind of sugary drinks can really decrease your health in many ways. Too much soda can really do some damage, so before you drink that oversized soda let’s take a look on what it has done to people’s health and how the state of New York has tried to help with drinking oversized sodas with trying to put the soda ban in action.

This ban limits the Americans consumer of how much they want. In article 1, Liz Berman, chairwoman of New Yorkers Beverages “We are smart enough to make our own decisions about what we eat and drink.”(Lines 26-28) Coming from

There are few who might censure Chairman Bloomberg for working towards the objective of a more advantageous New York. Lamentably, there are numerous who might condemn Leader Bloomberg for trying to accomplish that objective the wrong way. Indeed, most New Yorkers think the supposed "pop boycott"— which would restrict the offer of sugar-sweetened drinks more than 16 ounces by most sustenance foundations — is an awful thought.