Food Inc.

The arguments presented in the documentary Food Inc. make the movie incredibly persuasive. The movie appealed the pathos through the story of Kevin's death because of e coli. Had the animals been kept in more sanitary conditions, or were raised in the manner they were meant to live in, then the e coli disease would not have been introduced to the human population. The documentary also established the ethos as the producers interviewed the farmers for the controlling companies, such as Monsanto. The movie makers also played with rhetoric when they put a single short sentence, "Monsanto declined to be interviewed for this film." The short sentence drew attention to it and also helped to strengthen the producers arguments that the companies would not even deign to explain themselves. When the film makers legitimized their ethos they also established their logos. The people interviewed provided the evidence for the producer's arguments with their stories and the footage they provided of how the animals or workers were treated. The most persuasive argument in this film was the mother petitioning for after her son died (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HzAN_het4KM). The story made me think of my own future children, and how I would do anything to keep that from happening to them. That single argument moved me to want to act.