We are after all dealing with children and not lab animals. Yet in his article Crister is trying to persuade the American family that punishing children for over eating is a good idea. The author does not explain exactly how his solution should be carried out or put into place. He also failed to state what the consequences of these actions might be. The author uses argumentation to try to persuade the reader that many parents do not care what their children eat.
In fact, you can buy them with taxpayer funded money (SNAP) as long as you get it at the grocery store and not at a restaurant. Should we expand government to police where we eat our fries, or should we limit government and allow people to make their own choices? 2) It’s not the same as a ban on advertising tobacco to children. I’ve seen this argument in a few places, “We don’t advertise cigarettes to kids, we shouldn’t advertise fast food to kids.” This is a false argument. It’s illegal for children to have or use tobacco.
As a result, his own recommendations include: limiting the consumption of sodas, junk food as well as avoiding a sedentary lifestyle. Weintraub's argument is that parental responsibility in food choices and physical activity over kids will result in combating childhood obesity, rather than only blaming the fast food industry by itself. To concur with Weintraub, it is the parent's responsibility to combat childhood obesity, although fast food industry also shares the responsibility. It is the role of the parents to instill good eating habits and to serve as role models for their children. If the kid has no medical reason for gaining weight then it seems acceptable to blame the parents.
He showed some causes of childhood obesity, and he thought that people should care more about the other causes. The aim of this essay is to analyze this article. First of all, the article was written by Pierce Hollingsworth who is the director of Stagnito Communications Inc. This company is a food, beverage, packaging and integrated marketing communications company, so he might give some biases about the food marketing. According to Pierce Hollingsworth (2004), the parents and school should not blame the food marketing for being the main cause of obesity rather than teaching and helping the kids to have good habit of eating.
* Briefly discuss one of the major rhetorical devices used and the impact it has on the argument. The purpose on the argument is one of the most important devices used. It shows why fast food companies shouldn’t focus or target children in their ad campaigns for the fact of the matter is they are too young to know what’s good and bad. “Michael Pertshuck, the head of the FTC, argued that children need to be shielded from advertising that preys upon their immaturity.” * What type of appeal does the speaker rely on most – ethos, pathos, or logos? The speaker mainly relies on logos.
It explains that we as parents not only have to fight against the media advertising the junk food commercials, but now we must fight against the public school system serving the poor choices in the school lunches. The author, Dr. Joseph Esposito is founder and developer of AlignLife Netraceauticals. The audience will most likely be parents concerned with their child’s health and well being. Overall, I like and agree with the information in the article. Galenet.galegroup.com “Health and Fitness Across the Curriculum.” Paperclip Communications (2005).
Writing Plan: Essay #__2______ Introduction: Approach to start (Hook or Attention-Grabber) | Why should the government control what we eat? They want to control what we eat because there’s so many kids obesity in America. | ThesisStatement | The government has some point to want to control what we eat. The obesity rate in America is very high. The government should have regulation on the fast food industry.
It is not the responsibility of private businesses to have the “children’s best interest at heart”, in part that is the job of the parents—to not allow their kids to be manipulated, —the advertising campaigns private companies create, have tremendous influence on what children want to eat. Advertising too easily influences children and the marketing of today’s food industry and this type of disguised advertising, including high exposure to sugary soft drinks, sugary cereals etc… On prime time TV, is a major contributing factor to childhood obesity. Childhood obesity has become a societal
Imposing higher taxes on junk food will not encourage healthy eating. Taxes don’t stop people from buying things that satisfy them. By restricting dietary choices Americans will not suddenly know the difference between junk food and health food. The government cannot appropriately regulate and restrict improper consumption in people’s homes; they need to keep their hands out of Americans pockets and start fighting obesity through educating adults and their children on proper nutritional routines. Imposing a junk food tax draws attention to one of the most imperative questions which is how to define foods as unhealthy.
I do not agree with David Zinczenko opinion. In his article, “Don’t Blame the Eater” he starts with comparing the suing of McDonald for making them fat with suing of Porsche for making them gets a speeding ticket. Then goes on say that the “Eater” cannot be blamed for what is happening to them. There are many reasons why companies cannot be blamed, and even some of the evidence against the companies has flaws in them. If the blame is to be pointed at someone it would have to be the consumer.