A Rhetorical Analysis Of GMO OMG By Jeremy Seifert

On December 5, 2012, Daisy Luther, a journalist from Northern California wrote a blog entry on the conspiracy surrounding “certified organic” labels that is claimed by some companies and retailers. She brings up the question of whether these labels being stamped on food can really be verified or are they just a way to empty out the wallets of consumers. In the website The Organic Pepper, the blogger generally gives advice for different problems people encounter on a daily basis. Through her blog entries varying from ways to stay healthy to frugal living, Luther states her opinion of governmental interference on our food supply by citing sources from articles from Natural News and Time Magazine. She first starts out by arguing about how the

Based on the data gathered by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the average American consumes more than 150 pounds of sugar and sweeteners each year. When broken down, that’s 22 teaspoons of sugar consumed per day. Americans don’t even realize they’re eating this tremendous amount of sugar. In the documentary Hungry for Change, director Laurentine Ten Bosch uses rhetorical appeals to advise that the listeners consider what they are consuming and point out the dangers of sugar and processed foods in everyday diets. While the statistics provided throughout the documentary contributed to the overall effectiveness, the use of emotional appeal was excessive and over-dramatized.

Ever wonder what 's getting put into the food that you are eating everyday without thinking about the harm that you might be doing direct toward yourself just by consuming food that is supposed to be satisfying for you ? Dan charles in the article ‘ congress just passed GMO labelling bill, nobody 's super happy about it’. States that food companies will include to reveal weather products contain GMO ingredients although they won 't possess via print it on the package label. Dan uses epiploce and dinumeration to support his claim. The author 's purpose is to aware people advanced laws that are taking action in order to show how people feel about it the author addresses GMO foods won 't include to revelled in a formal tone.

David Zinczenko expresses his concern that in a grocery store, every item of food is labeled with the proper nutritional facts to show the consumer its health benefits or disadvantages. However, at fast food restaurants, David mentions, these nutritional facts are either not shown or are highly inaccurate. These could be extremely beneficial to the general public, but they’re not helpful if they’re not discernable. To prevent this, one would think that the easy fix is to choose more sustainable foods such as fruits and vegetables from local farmers markets. However, Radley and David both agree that unfortunately, fast food chain restaurants are much more convenient than a farmers market.

In the article entitled Monsanto's Harvest of Fear, Donald L. Barley and James B. Steele demonstrate that Monsanto already dominates the United States food chain with their genetically modified seeds. They are currently targeting milk production which is just as scary as the corporation's legal battles against the small farmers. This situation leads to a history of toxic infections or diseases. There were many disagreements between Gary Rinehart and a stranger about the innovative seeds. They were under surveillance and an investigator came in the picture.

In the movie Food Inc., company representatives were asked to make known the products that Genetically Modified Organisms are present in, and the food companies were not willing to give up that information. Because people are not allowed to know the full extent of what is in their food the consumer does not have full control of what they are eating. Food during the 1900’s did not have things such as Genetically Modified Organisms added into their food so they did not need to be worried about extra things added to their food. The meat packing industry during the 1900’s was better at making known what was in the food they were producing because they did not have the different things added in like industries do

Food, Inc. leaks a certain mystery behind, which contains the true secrets about the journey food takes. Food, Inc., a documentary that demonstrates the current and growth method of food production since the 1950’s, is designed to inform Americans about a side of the food industry. Food Inc. also used persuasion to demonstrates some components of pathos, logos, and ethos while uncovering the mysterious side of the food industry in America. Robert Kenner, the director of Food, Inc., made this film for a purpose. Uncovering the hidden facts and secrets behind the food industry in America.

The three essays assigned this week had several common threads running through them. The strongest core theme is the rapid change in the food cycle in America and the vast changes that have taken place in the way by which we grow, produce, and process the food that average Americans eat. The food we eat now is drastically different from what our grandparents grew up eating and the three essays each examine that in a different way. Another theme is the loss of knowledge by the average consumer about where their food comes from, what it is composed of, and what, if any, danger it might pose to them. “Monsanto’s Harvest of Fear” by Donald L. Barlett and James B. Steele is a harsh look at the realities of food production in a country where large corporations, like Monsanto, have been allowed to exploit laws and loopholes to bend farmers and consumers to their

In the excerpt from Silent Spring, Rachel Carson accusingly delivers a powerful argument against aerial pesticides, especially parathion. Carson emphasizes that farmers who eradicate “distasteful” birds with parathion are heartless. She deploys a variety of language to support her central argument: exemplification, rhetorical questions, diction, and emotional appeal. Carson believes poisoning birds--with parathion--is cruel and inhumane.

For years, the health and safety of genetically modified foods have been debated and researched by scientists, but the question still stands: should genetically modified foods be allowed for consumption? The process of genetic modification involves inserting a gene from bacteria or a virus into an organism where it would normally not be found. The purpose is to alter the genetic code in plants and animals to make them more productive or resistant to pests or farming techniques. Genetically modified organisms, more commonly known as GMOs, have been a controversial topic of debate for a number of reasons. The ethics behind genetically modified foods come into question due to an abundance of short and long-term effects from the process, many of which are still unknown today.

Everyday people are eating genetically modified organisms and don’t even realize it! There are many people that have absolutely no knowledge of what GMO’s are. The United States needs to pass a federal law requiring the labeling of all genetically modified foods in the country. There are over 60 countries around the world that require the labeling of GMO’s, so why isn’t America doing the same? As consumers, we have the right to know what we’re eating and feeding our families.

Rhetorical analysis Do you believe in order to understand other culture you need to try different food ? These are some ideas of this article from Amy S. Choi a freelance journalist. She wrote this article,“What americans can learn from other food cultures”. Choi betters her argument by providing real stories from other countries.

A corporatist markets off what they know would put them in financial ruin if people found out the truth behind what they claim is bettering the world. Once gathering enough positive claims, they proceed anyway. This is the quintessence of GMO marketing. Now, as the newest generation, millennials are likely to have been fed these genetically modified foods growing up, but have the technology to research and make their own intelligent and informed decision on whether these foods should be continued to be produced and distributed throughout the world. It is not being overly suspicious to not believe a corporation such as Monsanto, the leading agrochemical company, when with minimal research they publicize that GMOs are safe to consume.

In “The Pleasures of Eating,” Wendell Berry addresses the disconnection between food and its consumers, and argues how food industries distance consumers from knowing where and how their food is produced, which is making the consumers ignorant. Throughout the essay, Berry wants people to have a better understanding of their food, and how it has been affected by the food culture. Consumers would buy food without any question and believe that they are not participants of agriculture, which is making the ignorant of where their food came from. Food Industrialists have been a cause of creating this disconnection by persuading consumers to buy food that have been already prepared, which leads these consumers to become less aware of how eating affects

In his illustration “Genetic Engineering Cartoon” from the “Amazing But False!” series, artist Chris Madden emphasizes the perspective that both the anxieties about and the expectations toward the future of human genetic modification have reached a point of ridiculousness. Madden supports this perspective by utilizing social satire, hyperbole, and caricature. His purpose is to entertain audiences in order to prompt them to recognize the ridiculousness of certain aspects of the genetic engineering debate. Madden conveys his ideas in a sarcastic and humorous tone for an audience that is neither well informed about nor seriously interested in the debate over genetic modification.