To Eat or Not to Eat-Liliana Z.

In the short video “Domino’s Scientists Test Limits of What Humans Will Eat,” scientists ridicule American’s for their absurd eating habits. Using ethos, logos and pathos, the video satirically conveys the idea that many individuals consume foods that are almost as harmful ton one’s body as eating garbage. The video appeals to ethos by presenting the video in a very professional format; much like Fox News and CNN, “Onion News Network” includes a professional commentator reporting a Domino’s experiment on the eating habits of humans. According to Domino’s, the grosser and unhealthier pizza looks, the more likely consumers will be to pay money and consume the product. By including graphs, scientific data, and pictures, the video appeals to logos by giving the video a source of evidence and credibility. The video also includes shots of a scientific lab with scientists creating the pizzas, which gives the video a sense of professionalism. Gullible individuals may actually believe the video due to its imitation of other popular news channels. Finally, the video appeals to one’s emotions, or pathos, by relating the experiment to those done on animals. Despite the ethical concerns, Dominos is trying to prove that the food most people put into their body is comparable to animal food and garbage. At the end of the video, the reporter emphasizes the extremity of unhealthy eating by equivocating it to the deaths of five American in Afghanistan. This exaggerated comparison gives the viewer a sense as to how serious the issue of unhealthy eating is in America.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

One Response to To Eat or Not to Eat-Liliana Z.

  1. Lindsey Grubbs says:

    Nice work, Liliana. By pointing out how authority, emotional appeal, and design are in tension with the satirical bent of this “news” clip, you’re able to give a more detailed account of how the clip might work for different audience. I like how you’ve suggested that there are some audiences for whom it may be effective as a joke, and some who may miss it because of its rhetorical features.

    I think to take it a step farther, you could start to break this tension down point by point. You’ve argued that ethos, logos, and pathos add a kind of authority that might fool some people, but how does each deepen the writer’s satirical purpose? How does the exaggerated humor heighten the joke?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *