Rhetorical Analysis of GMO Articles
In the report by the National Academy of Sciences (NAS), “Genetically Engineered Crops: Report and Prospects,” Gould et al. provide logical appeals such as: scientific research, statistics, and other facts supporting the use of GMOs. In the article, Gould et al. disprove many common GMO misconceptions. Although no pathos is involved, this article provides reliable evidence and effectively argues the beneficial qualities of GMOs.
The National Academy of Sciences includes strong logical appeals to gain the trust of the reader. “Genetically Engineered Crops: Experiences and Prospects,” is logically organized; the subtitles are all common topics that anti-GMO advocates argue about, and the orderly structure is convenient for the reader. For example, most non-GMO consumers claim that GE crops threaten the environment; however, under the subtitle “Agronomic and Environmental Effects,” Gould et al. provide statistics that prove there is “no conclusive evidence of cause-and-effect relationships between GE crops and environmental …show more content…
Because this reports supports a lot of opinions, it would not refute an article in support of GMOs very well.
In “How We Eat: GMO Fight Ripples Down Food Chain,” by Annie Gasparro, the article promotes labelling GMOs and companies that switch to “all natural” ingredients (5). A majority of Gasparro’s article explains the difficulties that large food companies face switching to non-GMO ingredients. Gasparro includes facts that support the safety of GMOs while also advocating that they “infect” other plants (2). Gasparro appeals to the reader’s sense of ethos by providing examples of popular companies switching to non-GMOs, and also by including opposing views. Thus, Gasparro gives an effective
In the report by the National Academy of Sciences (NAS), “Genetically Engineered Crops: Report and Prospects,” Gould et al. provide logical appeals such as: scientific research, statistics, and other facts supporting the use of GMOs. In the article, Gould et al. disprove many common GMO misconceptions. Although no pathos is involved, this article provides reliable evidence and effectively argues the beneficial qualities of GMOs.
The National Academy of Sciences includes strong logical appeals to gain the trust of the reader. “Genetically Engineered Crops: Experiences and Prospects,” is logically organized; the subtitles are all common topics that anti-GMO advocates argue about, and the orderly structure is convenient for the reader. For example, most non-GMO consumers claim that GE crops threaten the environment; however, under the subtitle “Agronomic and Environmental Effects,” Gould et al. provide statistics that prove there is “no conclusive evidence of cause-and-effect relationships between GE crops and environmental …show more content…
Because this reports supports a lot of opinions, it would not refute an article in support of GMOs very well.
In “How We Eat: GMO Fight Ripples Down Food Chain,” by Annie Gasparro, the article promotes labelling GMOs and companies that switch to “all natural” ingredients (5). A majority of Gasparro’s article explains the difficulties that large food companies face switching to non-GMO ingredients. Gasparro includes facts that support the safety of GMOs while also advocating that they “infect” other plants (2). Gasparro appeals to the reader’s sense of ethos by providing examples of popular companies switching to non-GMOs, and also by including opposing views. Thus, Gasparro gives an effective