Everybody out there wants to make a difference in the world, right? Well, this site here provides a way for all people to support the cause they feel most strongly about. Care 2, created by Randy Paynter, is a site that offers postings supporting causes from politics to health policies to women's rights. Paynter aims to, as he states, "make it easy for everyone to live a healthy, green lifestyle and impact the causes they care about the most", and, last but not least, "restore the world's balance". For this week, we will focus specifically on and discuss one of the causes provided by the site - animal welfare.
http://www.care2.com/causes/animal-welfare/
I read the article about Pinups for Pit Bulls. This article is concise and to the point. It clearly states its purpose. This article addresses the opposing view: that pit bulls are inherently dangerous dogs who will attack anyone for any reason, and simply says that it wishes to change this view. It simply states that pit bulls are friendly, loving pets, and even talks about upcoming events at which "proud pit bull owners" will talk about their experiences with the breed. It is also a call to action. It talks about ways in which people may help the breed, and talks about key players in this movement. It has ethos in that it cites its sources, including more well-known people, like Shorty Rossi, as sponsors. Its call to action also helps, because it shows that the people in the article actually are doing something about the issue. It uses pathos because animal rights is a sensitive issue. There are many people who feel strongly about it, and who do not like to hear about animals who are treated unjustly. A weakness of the article is that it does not go into great detail about the effect that society's view has on pit bulls. Upon reading the article, one feels that society's view is inaccurate, but does not really get a feel for how dire the situation is, if it is at all.
ReplyDeleteI read the article "Idaho refuses to Protect Endangered Wolves". This article caught my eye simple because it had the wolve in the picture next to the title. The article was very compelling because it explained the history of wolves status in America. It talked about the entire process that the government had to go through to ensure that the wolve came off the endangered species list of 1974. Eventually, the wolve came off the list and people started hunting the wolves again. The government worked hard for this and now they want to just let the wolves die off in America because it is taking to much work to watch them again. There is not a definite way that the government will solve the problem of whether or not to put the wolves on the endangered list or not. After reading the article, I studied the lay out of the page. I really liked it. It told the story first, but it gave ways to make a difference. There was a link that said "Take Action" and that lead to explaining how you can stop the killing of wolves. It also had a poll to see how automatic responses from the readers, which was a great idea because it will most likely get the response the company wants to see since it is right after the article. The article and its lay-out was well thought out and it even made me want to want learn more.
ReplyDeleteI recently read "Seeing-Eye Donkey", just intrigued by the title itself led me to read the article. The article featured Recca, the seeing-eye donkey friend for CoStar, who is almost a completely blinded horse. Throughout the short article it described how both interacted together while roaming the pasture, the dedication Recca has for CoStar, and the happy ending adoption as "pasture buddies". Although this portion of the site is for an animal cause it is nice to read an uplifting story such as this. I think the author, Sharon Seltzer, used her pathos as a writer that would be appealing and pleasurable to read for any animal lover at heart. I also noticed the posts down the page. Just reading a few, all the posts seemed to be positive and were applauding Sharon's new article. All-in-all its nice to see some deviation from straight animal activism.
ReplyDeleteThe article that i read was, "Idaho Refuses to Protect Endangered Wolves". The article written by Mac McDaniel was about how Butch Otter, Idaho's governor, "has ordered wildlife officials in the state to no longer protect wolves or investigate their deaths." After confrontation with the federal government about hunting gray wolves after their return to the endangered list after recently being removed. I thought the article was very clearly stated of which side the author was on when i read this part of the article, "Governor Butch Otter has shown himself to be a single-minded and stubborn man who refuses to cooperate with the proper legal processes involved in wildlife conservation and obviously believes that managing animals and shooting animals are one and the same" it was very clear what side the author was on. I think that the author uses pathos throughout the article to make the reader side with him and feel compassion for the wolves. And i think it worked because out of hundreds of comments on this article, the few that i read were very compassionate towards the wolves.
ReplyDeleteI read the article about Britain's largest animal being shot and killed. A towering 9 foot tall stag was killed by hunters and multiple groups were distressed since it was in the middle of the deer's mating season. The author uses a lot of ethos to appeal to readers why the deer should not have been killed such as passing on its genes that had allowed it to become so large or that overhunting these animals is a horrible thing. The author does not recognize, however, the idea that if we do not control these populations, then we would be in another bad situation. For example, look at the asian carp in Lake Erie. They have no known predator over here so they have grown too large as a population. If we do not fish/hunt them and control their population, many native species will die because they have to compete with the asian carp.
ReplyDeleteI was browsing the sub-topics of animal welfare and found myself looking at a few animal testing blogs. On the front page was a petition to "Stop OSU: Live Dogs Abused in Heart Attack Tests Paid for With Taxpayer Dollars!" Being an OSU student this immediately peaked my interest. The description tells of how OSU experimenter George Billman is using taxpayer dollars to induce heart attacks on dogs to prove that exercise strengthens the heart. The author described the fact that exercise strengthens the heart as "common knowledge" and through this the author is appealing to the logos of the readers. The author is basically describing that it is illogical to re-test something that has already been proven. In addition, the author is relating the suffering and death of dogs to research that is attempting to re-invent the wheel. The blog offered an application to sign the petition as well as what other petition signers have been saying about the subject.
ReplyDeleteThe site is clean, features a "create a free online petition", sign up for a newsletter, and a relevant poll. The site also uses lots of lowercase typography in its layout, it gives it a soft, welcome, and hip look. The writers of the animal welfare part of Care2 seem to all be vegans and are freelance writers.
ReplyDeleteI read "The Deadly Sport of Horse Racing", it was written as a plea for help, a crying out to boycott any bloodsports (like hunting). "Racetracks, promoters, jockeys and owners are concerned with one thing and one thing only: money." is quite a generalization.
Although it seems the blog is very radical with the idea that they want no zoos, rodeos, circuses, hunting, and in this case animal racing to exist at all, it's not a realistic plea. I do agree, especially with one commenter that the conditions should be improved, because I don't see any of these attractions dying out.
At first look, the blogging website is very neat and organized. The various titles of the articles all reflect problems that are detrimental to the health of different species. As i began to look throughout the articles I noticed that many people responded to them. This is different from the other blogs because there responses were much easier to access to the general public. The article that I looked at is one fifth of animals face extinction and the feedback of the readers was all extremely empathetic. There wasn't any arguments that were visible to at least my eye and I think that it's due to the nature of the blog. The blog is targeted to animal lovers and those concerned about animal rights. Therefore one can assume that a large number of viewers have a heart of gold that extends to things other than themselves. This really peeked my interest because the tone of the blog seems tranquil and the responses that were elicited from the readers were all very concerned.
ReplyDeleteI really liked this blog because I am an animal lover. This a really good blog because it is very neatly organized and has some very interesting blog posts. A lot of people contribute to this blog and it seems that there is a lot of traffic in each blog post. Some blog posts have very sad facts and have a very good rhetoric. The use of pathos is the greatest in this blog since most blog posts are very emotional and make you feel empathy for the cause. Another really cool thing is that you help the cause by sining petitions or donating to organizations through some links that are posted on the blog.
ReplyDeleteThe feeling I got from this blog as a whole is one of caring and dedication. Everyone that contributes to this site are animal lovers so there is no arguing that is really done in the comments. Of course it is fair to point out that the post are on issues that no one is going to oppose for instance the article on how "sexy halloween costumes for pets"is wrong no one in their right mind would support those kind of costumes for pets because the logos behind such an argument would be very weak at best.
ReplyDeleteAt first glance of the blog, I first noticed that it is organized and has lots of information on animals along with a variety of other topics. The website also is fairly popular, having almost 14.5 million members. Most of the blog had a fair amount of comments, unlike some of the other blogs we have seen. The article I read was "20 Greyhounds Found Dead at Racetrack". It tells about a trainer who starved 32 dogs and may be charged for the murder of 8 additional dogs. The comments on the blog are filled with anger and outrage about how someone could do this to an innocent animal. People even go to talk about how animals shouldn't be used for sport. These discussions go to show how compassionate the people talking are towards animals. They try to make you feel bad for the animals, which is an example of pathos.
ReplyDeleteGreat job guys! Your blog getting full marks on these entries.
ReplyDeleteI read the article "End Dogfighting™ Campaign Slated for Philadelphia". I read it because it relates to where I live, 30 minutes from Philadelphia, and with animals, I love animals. Animal abuse is always sad because they cannot stop the violence and anger toward them. I will say that I disagree a little with the campaign. Dogfighting obviously happens in most major cities but Philadelphia? Why not Detroit or Atlanta? I would be willing to say that dogfighting happens in dirt poor cities and in southern major cities before it would happen in Philadelphia. I do agree that this should happen though. Just because it isn't as common in Philly, if they start a campaign against it, the dogfighting problem will be slowed or stopped in Philadelphia. It is always easier to prevent, then to cure; so this campaign should be effective.
ReplyDeleteI gravitated toward the article titled "We will be heard." This active title, combined with the quote of an American abolitionist accomplish exactly what they are meant to do. A reader glancing at the title instantly becomes aware of the emotion of the article and is drawn into reading the article. The article then begins with a speech from an abolitionist during the mid 1800s. Connecting these two movements gives historical context to the movement for animal welfare. This not only gives people background knowledge and adds to the tone of the article, but also shows that the author is willing to use research in order to help the cause. When I finally got to reading the article, I instantly saw the dramatic language which was meant to draw on the emotions of the audience. Statistics of the number of slaughtered animals are also tossed around in order to show the shear magnitude of the issue and make it more relevant to the reader. Overall, the author uses ethos, pathos, and historical context in order to make sure his message is heard.
ReplyDeleteThis blog appeals to many people simply because the vast majority of Americans cannot stand to see the suffering of animals, especially the cuter ones. Pathos is the main reason this blog will remain relevant in today's media. I read the post about the "Seeing Eye Donkey". This story just drips with cuteness.. If you see a cause that particularly hard on your heart strings, you can donate using the provided links. The blog also uses a slight guilt factor to convince you to donate money.
ReplyDeleteThe post titled "20 Greyhounds Found Dead at Racetrack" is used very well on this blog site, as it largely appeals to the pathos of many animal activists. The post follows the story of more than 20 racing Greyhounds that were murdered by their trainer. Some reports claim the the dogs were very poorly mistreated prior to their death. All over the featured site and especially in that article are stories and images that play really hard at the pathos of the readers. Being an avid dog lover, the article concerning the racing dogs really ruffled my feathers, as I'm sure it did many other readers. This enables the blog's petitions to receive more attention because of the emotional responses of the readers.
ReplyDeleteI feel that the website as a whole is a mass amount of compelling videos that hone in on pathos and makes a mass appeal in the form of tragic, happy, and interesting videos. A good portion of the videos are about animal slaughter, abuse, or deaths, which genuinely appeals to most people because there are very few careless people in this world. It just seems as one massive for of persuasion geared to make people compelled to supporting their cause.
ReplyDelete