Animal abuse has been a constant, underlying issue in modern society for a long time. Hidden in plain sight, most people tend to ignore or miss the signs of animal abuse. This issue is addressed in the advertisements created by Mikayla Slom and Alexandria Wai at the ISF Academy. Designed to appeal to an audience of animal lovers, the two advertisements suggest that animal cruelty is hidden away in many aspects of our lives and aim to make the viewer take action. These two advertisements both convey their messages using short sentences, slogans and symbolism to make the viewer think about their own part in the problem and urge them to take action about the issue.
Firstly, both advertisements approach the same general topic, yet have different ideologies. Both PSAs address the topic …show more content…
Both advertisements use direct, commanding slogans such as ‘stop animal cruelty’ (Slom, 2016) and ‘stop buying animal tested products’ (Wai, 2016) to directly address the audience, telling them exactly what to do (e.g, to stop buying products that test on animals) in order to take the most direct action against the chosen issue of the advertisements. However, only advertisement #2 utilises an open-ended rhetorical question in the slogan, ‘does your shampoo contain a hurting animal?’ (Wai, 2016), which reflects upon the viewer, consequently urging them to think of their own impact upon the issue. Additionally, both advertisements use large, bolded capital block font in order to draw attention to the slogans, which point out, as stated above, the actions the audience should take about the issue. However, while advertisement #1 focuses more on the use of ethos by stating facts to support the point and stating a logical reason for the audience to take action, advertisement #2 mainly uses pathos by using words such as ‘hurting’ to appeal to the viewer’s
Firstly, both advertisements approach the same general topic, yet have different ideologies. Both PSAs address the topic …show more content…
Both advertisements use direct, commanding slogans such as ‘stop animal cruelty’ (Slom, 2016) and ‘stop buying animal tested products’ (Wai, 2016) to directly address the audience, telling them exactly what to do (e.g, to stop buying products that test on animals) in order to take the most direct action against the chosen issue of the advertisements. However, only advertisement #2 utilises an open-ended rhetorical question in the slogan, ‘does your shampoo contain a hurting animal?’ (Wai, 2016), which reflects upon the viewer, consequently urging them to think of their own impact upon the issue. Additionally, both advertisements use large, bolded capital block font in order to draw attention to the slogans, which point out, as stated above, the actions the audience should take about the issue. However, while advertisement #1 focuses more on the use of ethos by stating facts to support the point and stating a logical reason for the audience to take action, advertisement #2 mainly uses pathos by using words such as ‘hurting’ to appeal to the viewer’s