Lego 's Partnership With Oil Interests And The Destruction Of The Artic Gave Greenpeace

In this ad it reads, “ One child is holding something that’s been banned in America to protect them. Guess which one.” It again gets straight to the point and is very blunt in its statement. There is no guessing what they are referencing or what their point is in this

When analyzing images for visual rhetoric, it is an important step to note first impressions that one gets from an image. Understanding the context of this image is crucial to analyzing which types of stakeholders would utilize these visually rhetorical strategies. Examples that come to mind include: ecosystem preservations organizations, entertainment companies that use animals and carry a message of conservation (e.g. SeaWorld). A more cynical mind might consider an oil company to use these visual strategies in order to convince the masses that their drilling for oil actually is environmentally conscious, regardless of how accurate that claim may be. Taking into consideration the calming green and blue hues as well as the inspiring “mission

Clearly, the purpose of the advertisement is to sell the new Nissan Leaf. The company’s stance reveals a commitment to saving the environment through technology; they seem to be admitting that global warming is real and that the automobile industry is one of the primary culprits.

Is developing the Arctic for oil and natural gas worth the powerful negative impact on the environment and native communities? The article published on September 20th, 2013 by Jennifer Weeks titled, “Future of the Arctic” examines the Arctic and the controversies within it. In the pro/con section of her article, Weeks asks the question, “Should the United States suspend Arctic offshore drilling?” Senator Mark Begich argues that the resources in the Arctic are too great of an opportunity to miss out on. Although Arctic drilling is a controversial topic, many people believe it should continue because of the financial and ethical circumstances; however, evidence to support this is lacking, which leads to the other side of the debate to be in

In his essay titled “Climate of Denial”, Al Gore, a well known environmental advocate and former vice president, verifies the reality of climate change and global warming. The piece is an attack on corrupt companies and news outlets that attempt to persuade the public that global warming is not a critical issue. Gore also earnestly conveys our environment’s current state and offers possible solutions that would increase awareness about global warming and begin to revert the planet back to a healthier, more sustainable state. The overarching purpose of Gore’s work is to call attention to the widespread climate change that is occurring. However, he also focuses on the corruption and bias within the media, and their attempts to conceal the truth about global warming. Writing to those who are conflicted about who to believe, he makes a valid argument that defends the beliefs of he and his fellow activists and encourages others to become more active in the climate change issue.

The news media often chose to highlight the views of environmental groups who had originally been opposed to Exxon’s drilling. These groups “traditionally feared oil development and oil tanker traffic in Alaska, and the opposed the trans-Alaska pipeline from the onset” (Birkland, 1998). They would, therefore, typically offer opinions that were most vehemently against Exxon and would make for more interesting news.

In a recent article, legions of protesters are still marching against the Keystone XL pipeline in the U.S on the basis that it will carry tar sands “dirty” oil. As tension builds up, the use of media from both sides got involved. Supporters of the oil sand are often seen as young, articulate, and well educated. In a series of short advertisements for the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers, the professionals talked about their work in the oil sand industry and why they love building the Alberta brand. Weeks after the supporting advertisements, Robert Redford, an actor-activist, called the oil sand fuel “dirty” and showed images of floods and tornadoes were linked to carbon pollution from the oil sands.

The modern advertisements for the companies, that pollutes the ecosystem, are created to greenwash the public images for the organization. Most of the big manufactures spends much bigger amount of money and time on its commercials to pretend to be clean or green other than actually developing the business to minimize the environmental imapct. In 2010, one of the popular gasoline company Chevron launched a campaign: 'We Agree," that represents that Chevron agrees and cares about the pollutions around the world. One of the images, that Chevron used, states "Oil Comapnies Should Fix The Problems They Create" with a picture of nature filled with the sludge from the gas companies and there is "We Agree" printed under the statement. This advertising angered some audience because many people believed that the Chevron was only pretending to care and the people changed the slogan to "Oil Comapnies Stop Pretending They Care," and made a "Chevwrong" nickname. For another example, there are many bottled water companies that produce a large amount of the plastic bottles.

As we have seen an increase in awareness around sustainability and climate change, with the help of Al Gore’s Inconvenient Truth documentary in 2006, we see organizations moving towards mitigating the effects of climate change in various ways (Al Gore, n.d). As this corporate social responsibility has become more prevalent, organizations are now pushing their green agenda by publishing sustainability reports, doing mass marketing and implementing sustainable business practices to portray the image that they too are working towards protecting the earth’s natural environment all the while focusing on their underlying goal of selling their products and

company. The argument I will present will be about how Shell is able to convince the reader .Convince the reader to believe the image that they put out for themselves through the use of visual rhetoric. Shell uses such visual rhetoric such as colors, text, size of image, image placement, in image visuals. The oil company Shell produced an ad with about a 60% picture and 40% word space. The ad was published in National Geographic. The ad hopes to develop a positive image of what the company is about, the colors are blue and show sadness of the current situation of

I believe there could be some accuracy in his claims because some companies do imply that green energy could be a scam just to get others to agree with their efforts. Furthermore, a lot of greenwashing takes place which can cause for even more concern.

Greenpeace tries to accomplish its goal of changing the way that Kimberly-Clark makes the tissue products by expressing all three elements of rhetoric within the advertisement. First, the advertisement uses logos to persuade the audience not to buy

This shows how important it is, to let the public knows that their actions actually matters to the world. Especially during my study abroad program, where I travelled to a number of European countries, it is obvious to me that the Northern Europe is way more aware of this situation and their way of living is comparably more conscious of their actions than the current situation in the United States is. Comparably, if the United States can have the same state of mind as these “Green” countries, the ripple effect will be way stronger than those countries as well. This gives me a strong motion to educate my future clients about the impacts they can make and how they can actually do the world a better good.

The problem that the pro- global warming theorists have created is that of social standing and little else. While there may be scientific backing to support some of the theory, the media presents the problem with great sensationalism. Global warming and energy conservation has thus become a trend and losses some of its validity through this. The scare tactics used by the media to “promote awareness” are just that, a linguistic ploy to gain favor. “Awareness of this global threat reinforced public concern and environmental problems and thereby provided environmental activists, scientists, and policy makers with new momentum in their efforts to promote environmental protection.” (McCright, 2000) This statement draws line to the potential benefits that would be received if the pro-global warming theorists were to draw enough attention to the issue. Driven by social empowerment and conviction to environmental protection, these activists misrepresent the actual threat and paint it as being much more

Environmental issues such as climate change affect life on Earth every day. As Leonardo DiCaprio discusses in his speech during the Paris Agreement for Climate Change Signing at the United Nations, the only way to diminish global warming, one of the most critical issues of this generation, is to take unprecedented action. By informing the audience with an effective strategy, DiCaprio persuades the delegates to make the right decision that will mold the future. His evidence compliments the coherent use of ethos, logos, and pathos. Climate change is a universal matter that can either persist, or be put to an end.