She is also careful with her word choices by replacing “soda” with its synonyms such as sugary drink, sweetened beverages, etc. to avoid repetitions. Unfortunately, despite her good writing skill, the original genre of the argument is identified as “newspaper editorial,” since it “has a journalistic style without detailed evidence” (WA 26). Although this type of genre suits the main purpose of The Upshot, the article’s place of publication, it inadvertently weakens the pathos aspect of the argument. It seems like Sanger does not have enough space for in-depth coverage of the issue and enhance on what Chapter Eight of WA refers to as the “audience-based reasons.” Since newspapers articles only contains short paragraphs, Sanger fail to incorporate some examples and analogies to “tap readers’ emotions and values” and serve as the pathos appeals to her message (WA 157).…
Hearing how NYC set a ban on large portions of soda, I honestly think that it is a good idea, what would be better is if they ban soda completely. Soda in general is unhealthy with all the sugar it contains it can rot children teeth. A lot of soda can be harmful if for example; if you put coke in your toilet it clean it spotlessly, and if you put it on a rusty part on your car it will eat away at the rust. If soda can do that imagine what it’s doing to your body. MT dew Contains Brominated vegetable oil, or BVO, acts as an emulsifier in soda and sports drink, preventing the flavoring to the surface.…
When writing an article to persuade your audience on a specific idea or topic, it is important to be very direct about what it is you are trying to persuade, leave out fallacies, and also have excellent credibility. Based on the two articles about adding a tax on sugary drinks or not, the article “Soda Taxes Fall Flat: Our View” by USA Today Editorial Board, is stronger than the article by Jim Krieger. I will first give you a short overview of each article and then inform you about details of why the article by the USA Today Editorial Board is a stronger article. First, I will start by giving you an overview of the article by the USA Today Editorial Board.…
Cohan's article adds to the discussion of the various reasons why a soda company would try to deflect the argument that the consumptions of its product are not related to obesity, and therefore,…
Things like a “fat tax” and banning snacks and soda in school are a couple of the examples he gives that show the government’s attempt to control what we eat. () What we eat shouldn’t have anything to do with the government. It is one freedom we wouldn’t think would have anything to do with politics. The examples are logical. Taking soda out of school systems would make children consume less calories and caffeine.…
Arguing Over Sugar During recent years, anti-soda crusaders have consistently blamed sodas for obesity’s sake. Certain states are taking this issue seriously. For instance, New York’s ex-Mayor Bloomberg submitted a plan to limit soda sizes; however, that idea was tossed out by New York’s highest…
This quote demonstrates that in order to see the number of purchases of sugary drinks to drop significantly enough to be relevant, taxing sugary drinks should be working. As a result, the number of sales of these drinks have still remain constant as before when taxes were not implemented yet. In the same way, people believe that this will help reduce the risk of getting diseases like obesity and type 2 diabetes. Simply, this is not that case. In the article, "What the Soda Tax Means for Consumers," by Brian Gale, he states, "... taxes are not necessarily the best or most progressive way to help people protect themselves" (11).…
It is not the government’s job to tell us what we are allowed to put in our bodies. A lot of controversy has come up with the Soda Ban Bill. The bill wants to limit the amount of soft drinks sold over 16 ounces. Ultimately, it is an individual’s choice on what they put in their body, and it is arbitrary for the government to try and regulate how much soda people consume. The government is trying to treat us like children who cannot make their own drink choices and it is unwarranted.…
A “fat tax” and banning snacks and soda in school are a couple of the examples he gives to show the government’s attempts to control what people eat. (Balko 897) Eating should not have anything to do with politics. Although, taking soda out of the school systems would make children consume less calories and caffeine. And yes, having a fat tax could stop people from buying unhealthy food.…
The so called “soda ban” isn’t really a ban on soda, people can still easily and legally buy it. For those that don’t mind the health effects or really enjoy soda, they can still buy more, smaller sized beverages. But for most people, it would cause them to make healthier choices in life. Revisiting the article of Sarah Conly, it is written, “Giving up a little liberty is something we agree to when we agree to live in a democratic society that is governed by laws. The freedom to buy a really large soda, all in one cup, is something we stand to lose here.…
Even though, it would be smart to ban these foods, people would be overall healthier and the country would be better. This argumentative passage at least makes citizens more conscious of what they eat and should keep these ideas in mind even if the decision doesn’t take place. It worked for me and the people I know that read these passages. The choice to shut down and get rid of big soda makes sense and is smart for New York because their citizens are probably one of the biggest targets in the “need of dieting” community.…
In the articles “Three Cheers for the Nanny State,” “Ban the Ban!,” and “Soda’s a Problem but…”, all three authors present their arguments with facts, opinions, and counterclaims. However, one article presents itself better than the rest. I believe that the article “Soda’s a Problem, but...” was the most convincing article. Sarah Conly- the author who wrote “Three Cheers for the Nanny State”- argues that the soda restriction is a good idea because people would be stopped from making foolish decisions that they’ll pretty definitely regret.…
In recent discussion of banning sodas cups larger than 16oz, a way of lowering obesity rate, an arguable issue has been whether it will be efficient in lowering the obesity rate or not. On one hand, some argue that it would be the first step to decreasing the obesity rate altogether. On the other…
It’s not the children that purchase soda it’s the parents, however child consumption is always the end result. He cites a 1999 study called ‘Liquid Candy’ by the Center for Science in the Public Interest. The study says, “In 1978, the typical teenage boy in the US drank about seven ounces of soda; today he drinks nearly three times that amount, deriving 9 percent of his daily caloric intake from soft drinks” (P54). Using this example he can reasonably say that the dark side of McDonald’s is that children and teens are the ones being affected by these sugar filled drinks as they grow up. The reader is shocked at how drastic the change in a teen has been when it comes to intake of soda.…
The New York Soda Ban Obesity has become a serious issue and danger for our society’s health. According to the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases’ National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey for 2009-2010, more than two in three adults are considered to be overweight or obese. But is this caused solely by the fact that we have become incontrollable consumers of everything or can there be a more complex reason? As the world develops, it is becoming faster, richer in choice of products, but at the same time poorer in terms of time.…