Peta 's Use Of Visual Imagery As Rhetoric

Two techniques in particular are ethos and plain folks. Ethos focuses on the emotional reaction to a piece and how well the ethos is displayed determines the effect it has on others. The impression lasting is what makes it so powerful. This lasting impression is carried on by the technique called plain folks. This is incorporated by a normal woman helping these animals and this gives us the impression that we can help just as she has. This also emphasizes a lasting impression. This campaign connects to everyday values by connecting the emotion to our own lives and showing how it affects our lives. It is stated that in animal abuse cases, “64.5 percent (1,212) involved dogs.” (CNN 1). The commercial makes change

The purpose of this paper is to discuss the methods of persuasion that are used in this commercial, and how the use of ethos, pathos, and logos has made the commercial from ASPCA persuasive and successful.

The People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) is one of the most recognizable organizations within the animal rights movement, due in part to their attention grabbing antics and controversial advertisements. While PETA has been successful in creating visual rhetoric that generally appeals to the audience’s cognitive reasoning and emotions they are often not successful in catalyzing actual change in behaviour.

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

The abuse of Animals is increasing around the world, for personal and recreational uses. Animals are used in ancient and modern medicine to cure different types of illnesses and diseases. Animals are also being used for testing different types of hygiene products; which leave many of them are left scarred for life, while others are left to die in a cage. Animal rights groups around the world are working around the clock trying to stop this abuse, groups like People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), and Humane Society of the United States (HSUS). Are working around the clock to make sure such practices stop. This paper will demonstrate how modern liberals view animal rights, and how animals are viewed within society.

PETA, though it does many things, has four main objectives. They focus on animal cruelty on factory farms, which are also known as confined animal feeding operations (CAFOs) and intensive livestock operations (ILOs). These farms are more worried about profits and high volumes of goods than they are about human health, safe food, the environment, fair treatment of animals, and the surrounding economy (Factory Farms). PETA also focuses on cruel treatment to animals in laboratories, in the fur trade, and in the entertainment industry (like Khartoum). They also work on projects helping birds, beavers, and abused backyard dogs, as some examples. To reach the public, PETA uses many tactics, including working “through public education, cruelty investigations, research, animal rescue, legislation, special events, celebrity involvement, and direct action.” (PETA: Official Page). PETA tries to reach the public any way possible.

The ASPCA announcement uses the rhetorical devices, logos and ethos to convince its audience to donate. Logos is the appeal to logic, and ethos is the appeal to morals. The commercial states facts about how thousands of animals are abused every day. It states that a small donation of only eighteen dollars a month can make a big difference by providing many different forms of aid to the animals. The ASPCA advertisement translates this to sixty cents a day to show how small the donation really is. This is somewhat of a logical and ethical appeal. It appeals logically to the audience because for just a small monetary donation the viewer can help save abused and neglected animal from their abusers and provide medical care, food, shelter and love. This shows that the donation can be used in many essential ways to care for the animal, and that their donation is responsible for giving the animals a second chance. This too is an ethical appeal because donating will make the viewer feel like a good, virtuous person because they contributed to an important cause. One the other hand if they don’t decide to donate they may a have a burden on their conscience because not that much money is needed to help make a big difference. In other words the viewer may feel like an unethical and bad person. The advertisement goes on to state that if you donate then you will receive a welcome kit that contains a t-shirt, wristband, and a photo of an animal that has been given a second chance because of you. All of this is a further amplification of the logical reason to donate to the ASPCA. The advertisement also uses ethos by having the Grammy winning artist Sarah Mclachlan as the speaker. Sarah seems to speak very truly and caringly about the ASPCA as she pets a dog that’s in her lap. This makes the audience feel like Sarah truly cares about the treatment of animals. As a

PETA, an animal rights organization, has been known over the past several decades to post racy ads. In June of 2013, PETA launched an ad with the purpose of getting its audience to go vegan. The ad is a photo of a toddler with a lit cigar in his mouth with the quote next to it, “You Wouldn’t Let Your Child Smoke. Like smoking, eating meat increases the risk of heart disease and cancer”. The ad included “Go vegan!” in the bottom right corner with the organizations logo next to it. PETA is trying to send a message to its viewers to stop eating animals. The attention drawing ad evokes an emotional response, contains logical reasoning and is from a credible source.

The first use of rhetoric that is seen is at the start of the commercial. The commercial opens by simply showing the symbol for the Humane Society of the United States, which is the shape of the United States made up of animals. It then shows the animals being rescued by the teams of people that work for the HSUS. Every worker is wearing a shirt with the HSUS logo on it. Opening up with their symbol, and showing the pictures and videos of the recues with workers wearing HSUS attire establishes their good use of ethos. When a person watches this commercial, they see that the Humane Society of the United States is an organization that is built around the belief that animals want, and need to be cared for and loved. It

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

Envision the average American household having a lovely time watching advertisements on the television when suddenly a commercial about animal abuse plays and they hear “Angel” by Sarah McLachlan. It’s the famous commercial that tugged at everyone’s heartstrings back in 2007 (http://www.redbookmag.com/life/pets/news/a41805/sarah-mclachlan-aspca-commercial/), but the reason for its popularity can be described with the elements of an argument. Indeed, an argument is being made with those sad puppy eyes, and it is one that’s being made to appeal the crying audience. The animal cruelty video by the ASPCA featuring Sarah McLachlan is an example of a successful advertisement for these reasons: it’s use of emotion, logic, and credibility.

Violence is everywhere in the United States of America. Many people in America and around the world have been a victim or know someone who has been a victim of violence. Over 22 million women in the United States have been raped in their lifetime according to the website, Victims of Crime. This number is significant. Advertisements could play a role in making violence more acceptable in our society. PETA, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, is known for having shocking advertisements. This pro-vegan and pro-vegetarian nonprofit organization has always been a topic of interest. Many of PETA’s ad campaigns are related to sexuality, violence, discrimination against how people look, and dominance over women. There are many

Two of their most well-known examples of popular rhetoric are the use of television advertisements and their website. The first image seen in its commercials is an animal they are saving, so that the noticeable fixation on your screen is a mistreated puppy. Similarly, the ASPCA’s website organization, content, and layout are all formatted primarily to entice and encourage the public to donate money. Clearly, the ASPCA’s intended persuasive appeal is for whoever is watching or visiting the site to donate. After careful examination of both its television advertisements and website, one can see that the ASPCA knows how to rake in the cash by using guilt against its audience. The sole purpose of the organization’s commercials and website is to get its audience to support its cause through donations, not to educate you on animal abuse. Because the video makes such a strong emotional appeal, it more effectively targets people, especially women, who tend to be more susceptible to sentimental

Ethos and kairos are two rhetorical appeals that this advertisement uses, referring to the credibility, or how trustworthy the source can be to draw more people to believe it. PETA itself is one of the largest animal rights organizations, having

Animal cruelty continues to plague the meat and dairy industry and a policy to reverse this is enacting stricter regulations on meat and dairy labels that explicitly state the additives and preservatives used on the product. Moreover, my policy will persuade people to purchase meat and dairy that is ethically raised and is not made with preservatives or additives, this is my value of health. Moreover, my policy is for those who eat meat and dairy and are unaware of the health side affects of consuming it and the animal cruelty that goes into producing a piece of meat or glass of milk, which encompasses my value of compassion. We are a compassionate species who turns the channel during an ASPCA commercial. We root for Nemo, Babe and Bambi yet we watch the movie whilst eating fish, pork or venison. The hypocrisy is unbelievable yet not talked about. Most Americans do not recognize this link between our compassion and the animals we eat and the hypocrisy that surrounds it. In this essay I address the compassion humans posses and how it is being wiped out through eating meat and dairy. I also address how we have the potential to rid the meat and dairy industry of the abuse. I will also discuss how meat and dairy is detrimental to our health.