Food Inc Rhetorical Analysis

Food Inc. interviews notorious authors, farmers, and food advocates. Each interview’s credibility is gained by the movie maker because he acknowledges experts from both sides of the argument. The interviews demonstrate the individual’s knowledge of the food industry. The audience can now make an informed decision on the view after seeing both sides of the argument. Additionally the film makers include a depressing interview that depicts the

Factory farming is currently meeting the needs of supply and demand which is beneficial to the economy. However, with the lack of regulations and enforcement of current regulations by authority entities such as the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA), it is ethically and morally unjustifiable for these corporations to practice and conduct business this way. The USDA and FDA are not the only players who are to accept blame in this unethical practice. State and federal laws should investigate and collaborate with those agencies to develop, execute, and retain safe and clean practices. Perdue Farms should also accept personal responsibility and be concerned about their workplace, their employees, the animals that make them money, and the consumers. The ethical theory being put into place

I am so ashamed that I had not known most of the information that was shared in Food, Inc. I definitely agree that we need to have a policy change regarding our food, it should be cheaper to buy carrots than chips at the grocery store. I, like many college students, want to eat healthy but it is expensive and most of us are on a “ramen budget”. There also needs to be tighter laws regarding the illnesses that can come from improper handling of the meat and crops. I believe that there needs to be a huge change in the agricultural world, the farmers should not have to be scared of losing money or being sued because of big companies, such as Monsanto. The huge companies are going to be making money no matter what without much work. Whereas a farmer puts in work day in and day out and sadly they do not make much money. I also believe that the film had an extremely negative outlook on how modern farming practices in agriculture are. I believe that Food, Inc. focused on the negative outlook of modern farming but did not mention about the different practices or how they have also positively impacted our

Michael Pollan's In Defense of Food: An Eater's Manifesto is an eye-opening analysis of the American food industry and the fear driven relationship many of us have with food. He talks in depth about all the little scientific studies, misconceptions and confusions that have gathered over the past fifty years. In the end provide us with a piece of advice that should be obvious but somehow is not, "Eat food. Not too much. Mostly plants." He follows the history of nutritionism and the industrialization of food, in hopes to answer one question….. how and when "mom" ceded control of our food choices to nutritionists, food marketers and the government.

‘Food Inc’, is an informative, albeit slightly biased, documentary that attempts to expose the commercialisation and monopolisation of the greater food industry. The film attempts to show the unintended consequences resulting from this, and for the most part this technique is very effective; however there is an overreliance on pathos in lieu of facts and statistics at times.

American agriculture can produce more food on less land and at cheaper cost than any other nation. Did anyone ever wonder why or how? The documentary Food Inc., produced by Robert Kenner, is designed to put the spotlight on the unsafe preparation of food products, the inhuman treatment of animals being used, and the unethical treatment of workers in corporate farming. Robert Kenner uses multiple rhetorical analysis to get his aspect across to his viewers. Throughout the movie, there are several claims to appeal of ethos, pathos, and logos in order to uncover the true secrets of the American food during its journey to the table.

Our nation’s industrial farming has become more than just feeding people; it has become a way for the food industry to make more money as human population continues to grow. Jonathan Safran Foer in his book Eating Animals, illustrates the effects factory farming has had on animals meant for human consumption. Furthermore, Foer asks many questions to the reader on what will it take for us to change our ways before we say enough is enough. The questions individuals need to be asking themselves are: how do we deal with the problem of factory farming, and what can people do to help solve these issues? Eric Schlosser in Fast Food Nation, also illustrates the animal abuse that goes unseen within the food industry as well as Bernard Rollin and Robert Desch in their article “Farm Factories”, both demonstrate what is wrong today with factory farming. Foer gives such examples of employees who work in slaughterhouses giving accounts of what goes on in the kill floors, and stories of employees who have witnessed thousands and thousands of cows going through the slaughter process alive (Animals 231). Namit Arora in the article “On Eating Animals”, as well as Michael Pollan in his book The Omnivore’s Dilemma, both address some of the issues that animals face once they hit the kill floor. The food industry has transformed not only how people eat, but also the negative effects our climate endures as a result of factory farming as illustrated by Anna Lappe in “The Climate Crisis at the End

For example, the film presents the counterproductive result of feeding cows with contained brains of infected cows that spread a deadly disease through the cattle known as ‘the mad cow disease’. This type of intensive farming is characterized by its use of antibiotics and pesticides that cost higher prices for farmers. Some farmers turn into the industrial farming not always by choice but for companies that own or influence those intense farming practices. There is two agribusiness that has a monopoly the market by selling agricultural technologies to farmers such as pesticides, GMO, and fertilizers that often influence the public policy and farming practices. This system is unsustainable and produces cheap food products which cost is not included in the market but people end up paying for due to the externalities on health, social and environmental problems. As the documentary highly at the start, Americans hate the most the inconvenience of things and therefore some people take for granted their food and prefer to consumed processed products that are toxic, other people who live in food deserts do not have much choice to consumed these toxic products but is the system that limits their accessibility to affordable fresh

The movie/documentary Food, Inc. came out in 2008, directed and starred by Robert Kenner. Kenners’ goal for this movie was to show the people of America the food they are eating and how there food is being processed, feed, treated, and killed. Kenner uses a very serious and

The Omnivore’s Dilemma by Michael Pollen utilizes elements of ethos and metaphors in the passage on pages 116 and 117 in order to persuade readers to believe that humans have become a “race of corn.” Ethos is one of the most notable forms of persuasion Pollen uses. He gets credibility by asking “Todd Dawson, a biologist at Berkeley, to run a McDonald's meal through his mass spectrometer and calculate how much of the carbon in it came originally from a corn plant...in the various McDonald’s menu items” (Pollen 116). Including a study written by a certified professional lends more support to his argument of the presence of corn. In addition, he also mentions that the research mentions menu items from McDonalds, a well-known, unhealthy company,

Have you ever been in a rush, low on cash, and looking for something to eat so you didn’t really have a choice but to grab a burger with fries at your local fast food place? Have you ever paused or stopped to think about where the burger really came from, or the process that went in to be made? The Food Inc documentary investigates and exposes the American industrial production of meat, grains, and vegetables. Robert Kenner the producer of the film makes allegations in this film and he explores how food industries are deliberately hiding how and where it is our food is coming from. He emphasizes that we should find out where our food comes from and why is it that the food industry does not want us to know. Food Inc. does not only uses compelling images, such as hundreds of baby chickens being raised in spaces where they do not see an inch of sunlight, it also includes the speeches and stories of farmers, families, government officials, and victims of the food industry. The four current problems facing today’s food industry are the reformed usage of the false advertisement within the labeling of products , mistreatment of farmed animals, and the harmful chemical in our meats. The documentary Food Inc uses very persuasive tactics that demonstrates strong elements of pathos, ethos, and logos make an effective appeal, while uncovering the dark side of the food industry.

“The Cato Institute’s” Policy analyst, Radley Balko, in his article “What You Eat Is Your Business,” talks about the idea of obesity and whose fault it is. Balko’s purpose is to convey the idea that obesity is the individual’s responsibility, not the government’s or anyone else’s for that matter. Ultimately, Balko’s “What You Eat Is Your Business” has a strong hold on ethos, pathos, and logos, making for a successful and persuasive article.

The claim that Ventura makes is that many beauty products are made to grab our attention and contain ingredients that can be extremely harmful to our health. She uses specific examples and experiences of other people to show exactly how these chemicals in beauty products can harm our health and the possible allergic reactions one can have. She focuses her support in specific details on the ingredients contained in the products we buy and the direct effects they have on us. She made many points that convinced me that some ingredients in the products we buy, how dangerous of a reaction you can have, and how there are many products that we buy that really aren't as natural as companies say they are. She cites that the authors of No More Dirty

The film Food Inc., like many other films of its category is not so much of an informative documentary, rather more of a slanderous exposé which blows the lid off of the food industry and its operations. To say that the film is neutral and tends towards more of an educative approach would be a misinterpretation to say the least. Throughout the entire movie it is always evident that the movie aims not solely to educate its audience about the truth of their food, but to convert the misinformed and inspire a rebellion against food industry practices. The movie does this through a tactful approach of bombarding its audience with gruesome clips, facts and testimonial story lines. The film asserts it claim through a thrilling critique of the horrific meat production process which is most prevalent in the U.S food industry and its impact on humans and the environment, while extoling alternative practices which seem to be more sustainable and humane, yet are underutilized. The film goes on to highlight the different players in the food politics arena, emphasizing the role that government agencies play. Also the film divulges the reality that is the monopolization of the food industry by big multinational corporations such as Monsanto Company, Tyson Food, Perdue Farms, Smithfield Foods, etc.

“Well, folks, where there is so much food in this world there ought to be a problem arising here.