Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 7


Palafox, Veronica
Professor Degraffenreid
English 113B
19 March 2015
Project Space: Final Draft
Word Count: 2,143
Moving Pictures
It is no secret that we live in a world where propaganda is accessible to people
worldwide; advertisements are being displayed from bathrooms to even the smallest handheld
electronics. We are surrounded by ads every minute of every second of our lives. Even though
many ads aim to persuade a specific audience to feed into the brand they are selling, some ads
are more effective when it comes to embedding rhetorical appeals. Displayed, are two ads, the
first ad is about PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) and the second ad is about
Surf Rider and their attempt to keep all oceans clean and free of any plastic. Although some
might argue that the PETA ad does a much more successful job at capturing its audience
attention through pathos, the Surf Rider ad is more rational and convincing because it equally
balances out the rhetoric appeals, which makes this ad more successful.
Before analyzing both images we must take into consideration who the intended audience
is for the PETA and Surf Rider advertisement and what their primary argument is for that
audience. All ads have a specific audience and what that means is before they can put out any
advertisement they must take into consideration what is the cause and why they are putting this
message out to capture the attention of that audience. In the PETA ad we notice that the
demographic leans more towards an older audience, the ad does not have any spontaneous colors

for a child to look at nor does the ad display a teen in the ad. PETA is trying to get its audience to
believe that by eating an animal it makes most people capable of eating a human because of the
reason being that they all have the same body parts. It is a pretty twisted idea but it is what the
advertisement wants its audience to believe. The PETA ad takes a different approach when it
comes to convincing its audience to believe their intended argument, they dont ask for money
but instead they ask that they stop the intake of eating any meats to support the organization.
Although, PETA isnt asking for money they are technically asking their audience to boycott
meat so that the meat packing industry loses money, aside from that they encourage those
reading the ad to send donations to help these helpless animals. In the Surf Rider ad we notice
that the demographic portrayed in this image is entirely different because it is taking a wellknown worldwide dish and displaying it to a broad audience. The colors that are used in the
image are mainly blue representing the ocean. The Surf Riders intended argument is to try and
build awareness for their organization through this fairly well known image of sushi. These
organizations both give their audience a clear understanding of their intended argument and that
is to give money to the organization to support their cause.
To begin Ethos is the first rhetorical appeal that can be sometimes hard to identify,
especially if the creator of the visual did not choose a specific figure or personality to make the
ad more believable for its intended audience. Ethos is established through the credibility or
character of the writer (slide 4). In order for the writer to convince its intended audience it must
use ethos to prove to its audience that they are using knowledgeable information. The better the
expertise the more rational the advertisement becomes to the reader. In the ad about PETA it
perceptibly displays its figure and that is in this case Pamela Anderson, she is displayed in a
conceptual way that almost makes her look like a piece of meat. Pamela is displayed in a

revealing baby blue bikini and her body is specifically labeled like a piece of meat. Even in the
article it is obvious that PETA is glamorizing the idea of becoming a vegetarian by saying that
Voluptuous vegetarian Pamela Anderson is proving that all animals have the same parts and
encouraging people to ditch meat (PETA). The ad wants its audience to believe that by
switching to a meatless diet one day they might look like Pamela Anderson, which we all know
is probably not likely, unless people plan to go through a process of many different surgeries, too
look susceptible like her. This ad may easily capture the attention of people but it seems like the
ad is more so directed to men if not so much women. Another thing PETA is doing is trying to
manipulate its audience by using animals; they know that we are susceptible to the love we give
to our animals. The ad reads All animals have the same parts, it is a catchy phrase but it also
directly states its real argument and that is to stop the consumption of eating any sort of animal.
On the other hand the Surf Rider ad takes its figure and turns it into a popular seafood
dish that is well known as sushi, which is the representation of ethos. The reason why this
specific food is interpreted as ethos is because many Americans love to go out and eat sushi.
Also when most people think sushi they think of raw fish, and where do these fish come from?
They all come from the ocean. Although most sushi isn't raw that usually is the number one thing
that comes to mind with the word sushi. At the bottom of the image it reads in big bold blue
letters what goes in the ocean goes in you. The main message embedded in this visual is to
stop the pollution of any sort of plastic from getting into the ocean, because the fish in the ocean
feed off that garbage, and then these fish end up being fed to the public. Both of these images
strongly emphasize on who and why they chose this specific figure for their ethos. It is hard to
narrow down which image did a much more successful job at presenting a well-known individual

to their viewers. But the ad about PETA is more successful when it comes to ethos because it
making their source credible to their reader.
Secondly, is Pathos and this specific appeal is the easiest to spot because it appeals to the
humans emotions. The tricky thing about Pathos is that sometimes ads go overboard on how
much Pathos they implicate within their ads. One very good example of this is the Sarah
McLachlan commercial that tries to get its intended audience to stop all animal cruelty. The
reason why this is a bad example is because this ad is too sad for viewers to sit through and
watch the entire ad. Many people have to change the channel because it is too horrible to watch,
this is an example of too much emotion being jammed into one advertisement. If the intended
audience is not capable of watching the advertisement because of the emotional demand, than
that makes it an unsuccessful ad.
The ad about PETA also is trying to persuade its reader in the same way that the Sarah
McLachlan ad is trying to do so, the only slight difference is that it is comparing a human to an
animal and placing them under the same category. This ad can easily make people upset, mainly
for one of the reasons being that some people will not like the idea of being compared to a farm
animal, let alone any animal. PETAs ad is trying to approach its audience with intent that by
placing this super model up and labeling her like a piece of meat maybe people might be able to
see that animals and humans share many similarities. Aside from displaying too much pathos in
this image, some may even say that it also displays that superficial idea that only super models
with perfect bodies are worthy of being displayed on a tabloid. This is where the PETA ad took
their advertisement and got lost within their idea of putting out an overly emotional image to
make people feel as if they are monsters for eating meat. In other words if people can eat meat
then it must be acceptable to eat a human. The message is very deep and although it might seem

mindful this image can say many different things to many people. Aside from the figure being a
celebrity, PETA really tossed pathos at their audience by manipulating them to think and see the
advertisement in the way the creators tailored the image for its intended audience. The PETA ad
is displaying too much pathos, which in a sense is uncomfortable to their intended audience.
The ad on Surf Rider takes a different approach by using pathos and implicating it into
food. Many people enjoy going out for sushi so this advertisement decided, what better way to
get the readers attention then by placing a picture of sushi but instead of having it wrapped in
seaweed we wrap it in a plastic bag. The concept is unique but it also gets the reader to think
about how this issue being presented to them will affect them and the consumption of raw fish. It
might be a dramatic way to think about the idea that these fish out in the ocean eat trash then are
served up for dinner, for us to eat. This ad does a really good job by getting its audience to
engage with the thought of how the causes of plastic pollution can be threatening to our lives. In
an article displayed on their Surf Riders website they specifically indicate what their objective is
with the exception of the small amount that has been incinerated, virtually every piece of plastic
that was ever made still exists in some shape or form(Surf Rider.org). They are aiming to stop
all usage and dumping of plastic into the ocean not just because it is bad for the marine animals
but with the exception that one day it will affect us also. The more successful ad in this case
would be the Surf Rider ad because they placed a good balance of pathos into their ad while on
the other hand the PETA ad instantly wanted its audience to get a burst of emotions and guilt by
comparing its audience to a helpless animal.
The final appeal is logos which is the logic embedded into the ad also recognized as
statistics and or any facts within the advertisement. In the PETA ad we only see two references
that can be looked at as facts and those are the print of the organization emblem, which is PETA

and the text that reads, Have a heart go vegetarian(PETA). The other reference in the PETA
ad is the organizations website where more information can be found about the cause which is
transitioning into a vegetarian diet. As for facts this ad has no factual evidence to back up its real
argument which makes it unreliable to its audience. The Surf Rider ad on the other hand gives
more facts to the reader at the bottom of the image it reads recent studies estimate that fish off
the west coast ingest over 12,000 tons of plastic a year. Find out how you can help turn the tide
on plastic pollution at www.surfrider.org/rap (Surf Rider.org). This information is very useful to
the reader because it provides not only a website but it also provides a fact about what plastic
pollution is and how it is affecting the fish we eat today. The more rational and logical facts an
advertisement presents to their reader the more credible the source of information becomes. In
this specific category the Surf Rider ad wins for showcasing more factual evidence to their
reader. Some ads sometimes dont emphasize on the facts of the subject and that is something
that is very important for advertisers especially when it comes to presenting their audience with
evidence to prove their ad is credible.
In conclusion many ads are capable of being successful but although many ads can be
successful it solely depends on how rational and convincing the advertisement is to its intended
audience. Every ad conveys a different message to different people, and it is sometimes not an
easy thing to do when it comes to a very broad topic. The most important thing to remember is
that ethos, pathos and logos are implemented into our everyday lives. As individuals sometimes
we dont over analyze these specific appeals when it comes to sitting in front of the television
watching a good five minutes of boring ads about how Jenny Craig can help you lose weight fast.
These appeals apply to everything, it simply is in our own personal interest if we choose to see
them or not.


Works Cited
ASPCA. "Sarah McLachlan ASPCA Comercial." YouTube. YouTube, Web. 16 Mar. 2015.
DeGraffenreid, Michele. Aristotles Three Argumentative Appeals California State University,
Northridge. Sierra Hall, 26 February 2015. PowerPoint.
Hickman, Bill. "New Rise Above Plastics Print PSAs from Pollinate."SURFRIDER. Surf Rider
Foundation, 24 Jan. 2012. Web. 17 Mar. 2015.
"Pamela Anderson Shows That All Animals Have the Same Parts." PETA. n.d. Web. 16 Mar.
"Rise Above Plastics." SURFRIDER. Ed. Ed Mazzarella. Surf Rider Foundation, n.d. Web. 16
Mar. 2015.