Tuesday, December 11, 2012
Multimodal Rhetorical Analysis
Jessica Kisner
Engl 191 – 17
Jack Hennes
Oct. 01, 2012
Welcome to Proactiv Now Faster
and Gentler Than Ever Before
For as far back as the media goes
there has always been tactics used by big companies of all sizes in
order to attract consumers and to sell their products so they can
make a large profit. No matter if it’s a television commercial, a
billboard, a magazine article, etc.;
advertisers will do all
they can in order to get people to buy their products, whether those
products actually work or not. A great example of this method is a
product that millions of people know about, are familiar with, and
may even use on a daily basis. The product is Proactiv, the most
popular skin care method on the market today. When visiting the home
page of this very large company a person can see this first hand. The
Proactiv home page is very effective in getting people to buy their
product by appealing to the consumer's logic, winning them over with
the authority of the experts and finally making them feel something
by targeting their emotions. It uses a combination of words, pictures
and videos as well in order to prove what a wonderful product it is.
Proactiv’s tactics have thus far proven successful in drawing in
millions of customers, and the website’s multimodal homepage has a
great deal to do with it.
When it comes to the process of
buying something, people tend to listen to those who appeal to our
logic, the "experts" in other words. Affecting a person's
logical appeal is defined by the term logos, this means persuading
someone by the art of reasoning. Logos tend to look at the claim that
is made, in this case if you use Proactiv then your acne will go
away, then it evaluates the accuracy of said claim. Logos will also
assess the effectiveness of any supporting evidence such as facts and
statistics. Because of these experts targeting our logic we are told
to invest our time listening to them and then eventually invest our
money in their product. Millions of people fall for this tactic every
day. To them, ordering this product seems the smart and logical thing
to do. In the specific example of the Proactiv homepage logic is
being used very obviously. If you type in "www.Proactiv.com"
in either the search bar or Google you will be taken directly to the
homepage of the website. Your eyes are greeted by friendly looking
faces playing on a slideshow that alternates with quotes from popular
beauty magazines such as Seventeen, Teen Vogue, or Allure. The
slideshow is almost enchanting, or could be described as such to
someone with acne. The faces are beautiful and clear, an ideal image
of the skin that every teenage girl or boy would want. What's even
more captivating however is the words and quotes presented on the
page. The way the website presents its product through words that
target our logic is quite impressive. For example, the quotes as
mentioned before that play in the slideshow say things such as "Best
Acne Product", by Seventeen, "Best of Beauty" by
Allure, and "Best Acne System" by Teen Vogue. It is clear
that the website thinks Proactiv is "the best" and uses
quotes from these articles to prove this and to get deep into our
minds, brainwash us in a sense. Although logic is a very large part
of the advertisement it would hold no credibility without the sources
they used.
Proactiv's website has the
amazing ability to win its customers over with the authority of the
experts that have dedicated so much of their time to creating this
product. On the multimodal home page you will see a specific tab just
for looking more in depth at the history of the product and the
people behind it. In doing this we tend to gain the feeling that
these two dermatologists have a great amount of credibility and can
be trusted. This is Proactiv attempting to hit home with our ethos.
The part of rhetoric that has to do with the ethical aspect of
persuading people, the legitimacy of the speaker, how credible they
are, and how much authority they have. For example on the bottom left
of the homepage, the website viewer is shown a kind face of a woman
who is obviously a dermatologist. It has a heading titled ‘Expert
Skin Care Advisors 242/7’. Then next to her photograph is a few
snippets of sayings with things such as ‘Our experts want to help
you achieve the best skin possible’, ‘NEW Proactiv 365. Care and
support: Every Minute Every Day’ and ‘for more benefits’.
Seeing this makes a person feel as though the dermatologists and
experts that vouch for the company are legitimate and have the
maximum credibility possible. It is possible when analyzing the
Proactiv Homepage to research the Founders of the product in order to
find out what they’re all about
Guthy|Renker is one of the
largest and most respected direct marketing companies in the world,
with distribution in 68 countries. Since 1988, Guthy|Renker has
discovered and developed dozens of well-loved, high quality consumer
products in the beauty, skincare, entertainment and wellness
categories. (“About Guthy|Renker”)
It was over 15 years ago now that
two men Bill Guthy and Greg Renker set industry standard and produced
Proactiv Solution. It has now become a bestselling acne treatment not
just here in the US, but all over the world. It has achieved its main
goal of helping millions of people reach their ideal clear skin.
Without this multimodal homepage consumers would know none of this
and be kept in the dark. Being able to learn about the people who
created their favorite product appeals to their ethics and justifies
them spending their hard earned money on it. However, in addition to
logos and ethos, the role that pathos play is also significant.
In rhetorical writing pathos is
the term used to represent an appeal to the reader’s emotion.
Humans have dozens of emotions so it’s not hard to believe that
pathos are the most commonly used and easiest to point out in any
form of writing. When it comes to Proactiv, specifically the
homepage, it is clear that this is most likely the main focus in
order to make customers buy their products. Recall the slideshow that
was previously mentioned; it is not filled with just any ordinary
friendly faces; they are celebrities. For example the beautiful face
of Naya Rivera is shown. Her name is in bold letters, then also in
bold letters below her name and pictures are the words “Proactiv
Customer” then in fine print underneath that is her status
“Actress, Glee”. This tells us that this beautiful girl with
perfect skin, an actress from the hit TV series, Glee, is just like
the rest of us and uses Proactiv. Also shown is Melissa Claire Egan,
also an actress, and Julianne Hugh, a very well known singer, dancer,
and actress. These three women’s pictures alternating with the
magazine review quotes are the very first things you see when opening
the page. This company knew how large of an impact they would have.
Teenage girls see their favorite actresses, singers, dancers, etc and
see that they use Proactiv. It not only makes them feel better about
having acne, but it is also incredibly gratifying to know you’re
using the same product as these people. This fact is almost
irresistible and continues to draw millions of customers in. However,
the viewer’s emotions are not finished being targeted; on the
bottom right of the screen is a video. If you click on it, the first
thing you will notice is the very dejected and sorrowful music. The
music fades to the background and an average girl, plain and simple
looking, begins to tell her story. She tells of how she struggled her
entire teenage years with unclear, and not so pretty skin. It made
her constantly self-conscious and was beginning to ruin her life:
until she got Proactiv. As a person struggling with acne watches
this, they can easily relate and feel as if this girl is speaking
directly to them. It makes them feel as if they are not alone and
finishes with giving them a silver lining, that glimmer of hope that
their skin can look like the beautiful women that flash before their
eyes on the very same screen. If one continues to explore the
homepage after watching the video, various links can be found at the
top as well. The very last tab is one titled “Success Stories”.
People are drawn to these sort of things, if they can be presented
with valid evidence that this product works for average people
everywhere as well as celebrities, it gives them that very strong
hopeful feeling that it will work for them as well. Proactiv has the
amazing ability to target those emotions deep in our core, it can
make us envious of those beautiful actresses and in the same minute
make us hopeful that we could have the clear skin they have.
Logos, Ethos and Pathos can be
found at the base of almost every multimodal aspect we come across,
and even some that are not multimodal. These three themes are
constantly being targeted and there is no exception with Proactiv. We
are drawn in by the logic of it all, held fast by the credibility of
those explaining the logic, then finally convinced after we are
forced to feel something. The combination of words, pictures and
videos plays a huge role in this website’s effectiveness as well.
Each part is crucial and pulls the whole thing together very nicely.
The Proactiv homepage is an ideal example of multimodal rhetoric at
it’s finest. In analyzing it, it becomes very clear that a fair
amount of time and energy is spent in order to sell the product. But
one must take a look for themselves to really understand, so go
ahead, “all you have to lose… is your acne” (Acne Treatment).
Works Cited
"Acne Treatment & Skin
Care | Proactiv® Official Site | Special Offer." Acne
Treatment & Skin Care.
Guthy-Renker LLC, n.d. Web. 09 Oct. 2012. <http://www.proactiv.com/>.
"About Guthy|Renker."
Guthy.
Guthy-Renker LLC, n.d. Web. 09 Oct. 2012.
<http://www.guthy-renker.com/about/>.
Researched Argument Essay
Jessica Kisner
Engl 191-17
Jack Hennes
Nov. 14, 2012
Human Experimentation – Is it
Ethical?
“From the beginning of our
history the country has been afflicted with compromise. It is by
compromise that human rights have been abandoned. I insist that this
shall cease. The country needs repose after all its trials; it
deserves repose. And repose can only be found in everlasting
principles.” - Charles Summer. From some of the most well known
cases, to the ones that are swept under the rug and hidden from us,
human experimentation dates back as far as our own history does. It
has not just been present, but also very common. Our world has
advanced far and wide in the medical field, but this was not without
some sacrifice and a dark history containing many untold secrets.
First it is necessary to look back on cases of human experimentation
that took place in our somber past. Second, we must examine why this
is unethical and defies every basic human right we are given. Then
the counterargument must be presented; many people believe human
experimentation is justifiable. Next, more recent cases will be
discussed and continuing on, human experimentation will be tied to
the story of Henrietta Lack’s. Finally we will look toward the
future and where human could possibly still lead us. The emphasis
however, is that any type of experimentation on a human-being is
utterly atrocious. It has destroyed millions of lives and continues
to today.
In order to better understand
the ethical and moral issues surrounding human experimentation, it is
crucial to establish knowledge of past incidents. One of the most
well known but also one of the most horrific was the Holocaust.
Although nearly everyone has at least heard of this tragic event,
most cannot begin to fathom the circumstances or begin to feel what
those individuals felt. The Holocaust is one of the most infamous
human experimentation examples in our history, but is it justifiable?
Of course not.
On January 30th,
1933 Adolf Hitler was appointed Chancellor of Germany with a Jewish
population of 566,000 (The History). From that moment on, panic and
terror was instilled upon this country. Jews were isolated, alienated
and terrorized. Then on March 22nd
of 1933, just 51 days after Hitler took power, the very first
concentration camp named Dachau was opened. From then on millions of
Jewish individuals were forced to spend their lives in this camp, or
ones similar to it. (The History). While being sustained in these
camps Jews were subjected to dozens of inhumane and torturous
experiments for the Nazi's benefit. They did not simply murder every
Jew, they put them through hell first by testing the body's limits
in ways never done before. For example, the freezing and hypothermia
experiment was popular with the Germans who had fought in war. They
wanted to know the effects of extreme cold on the body and how to
prevent them, due to the fact that hundreds died from freezing on the
Eastern Front. In order to do this they administered experiments to
the Jewish men in their camps. The freezing experiments were divided
into two parts. First, to establish how long it would take to lower
the body temperature to death and second how to best resuscitate the
frozen victim (Medical Experiments). The first part consisted of
submerging the body in an icy vat of water or leaving them naked
outside in the bitter cold, then forcing a thermometer in the rectum
to record body temperature. Most victims lost consciousness and died
when their body temperature dropped to 25ºC
(77ºF).
The second part, the resuscitation of the victim, had multiple
options. Victims could be placed under sunlamps so hot they melted
the skin, or perhaps have boiling water irrigated into the stomach,
bladder, and intestines. However, Jews in Nazi Germany suffered
through dozens more experiments such as this and discussing them all
would take ages. Those who were murdered right away, or died quickly
could almost be considered lucky. A man by the name of Dr. Josef
Mengele became known as “The Angel of Death” and would carefully
observe as prisoners arrived and got off the train at the camps. He
would then select any individual looking even slightly different and
take them with him to endure his cruel tortures. Specifically, he had
a liking for twins who were often murdered and then dissected limb by
limb. Nonetheless, any and all Jews were likely to be subjected to
experiments of freezing/hypothermia, genetic testing, being infected
with diseases, torture through interrogation, high altitude tests,
sterilization, surgery practices and traumatic injuries, only to name
a few (Medical Experiments).
Keep in mind as well, that the
Holocaust is only one specific case in the entire world. Many others
must be highlighted as well, remembering too, that these are not the
only ones, simply the most heard of. They include: The Stanford
prison experiment, The Aversion Project, North Korean experimentation
(which greatly resembled those of the Holocaust), The Tuskegee
syphilis study, Unit 731 in Japan, and of course the Nazi
Experiments. With each of these cases millions of innocent souls were
tortured. The lives lost were not only great in number, but offered
so much to mankind. How could we do this to our fellow human beings?
Under no circumstance are these events ever tolerable, for many
reasons.
First and foremost human
experimentation is downright wrong, especially in the extent that it
has been previously carried out. It tends to be based upon some sort
of discrimination. Typically one group is singled out by a more
dominant group, is deemed unworthy and inferior, then falls victim to
these cruel tortures. Discrimination could include race, gender, age,
religion,etc. But we are all human, the same species just with our
own variations. Differences in any physical demeanor do not make
someone less than another and this is not a reason to be violated and
mistreated. It dehumanizes, brutalizes, alienates, and when it comes
down to it, simply destroys a person, a family, or even an entire
culture. It is barbaric to say the least. Also making it unethical is
the fact that it is frequently used only to benefit others. For
example, the Tuskegee studies, where black men with syphilis went
untreated despite the doctors knowing of their condition only so the
effects of the disease could be studied. Another example is the
practice of illegal surgery on humans in order to establish the right
techniques for later patients. The list goes on and on of other
instances as well.
Human experimentation,
particularly when it is against a person's will, raises fundamental
questions of medical ethics that date back to the ancient Greeks. In
ancient Greece physicians adopted the Hippocratic Oath, which made
all doctors swear to do no harm to one's patient, or indeed, they
shall bare the consequences (Hamblin). This clearly exhibits that
medical experiments have almost always been surrounded by ethical
concern, and when those lines are crossed it is known to be
unacceptable, improper and misconstrued. Therefore, those who carried
out the horrific acts must face their punishment. The Nuremberg
trials demonstrate this fact very well.
At the beginning of 1940, the
Polish government-in-exile asked the British and French governments
to condemn the German invasion of their country. The British
initially declined to do so; however, in April 1940, a joint
British-French-Polish declaration was issued. Relatively bland
because of Anglo-French reservations, it proclaimed the trio's
"desire to make a formal and public protest to the conscience of
the world against the action of the German government whom they must
hold responsible for these crimes which cannot remain unpunished.
(Nuremberg Trials)
The Nuremberg trials sought out
to make the most prominent members of the political, military, and
economic leadership of the Nazi Germans pay for their crimes. So on
November 1st,
1943, the United States, United Kingdom and Soviet Union published a
document warning that they would pursue the Nazi's to the “uttermost
ends of the earth... in order that justice may be done”. The trials
began November 20th,
1945 and continued until sentences were read on October 1st
of 1946. Twelve of the accused were sentenced to death by hanging, 7
received prison sentences and 3 were acquitted. Of the twelve to
receive the hanging, two were not hanged. Hermann Göring committed
suicide the night before and Martin Bormann was killed in his attempt
to escape in May, 1945 (Nuremberg Trials). The medical experiments
conducted by German doctors and prosecuted in the so-called Doctors'
Trial led to the creation of the Nuremberg Code to control future
trials involving human subjects, a set of research ethics principles
for human experimentation. The millions of lives lost through sick
and twisted operations can never be replaced, and to explain how
unfair and misguided human experimentation is, is impossible.
Yet we must still analyze the
other side of the argument. Somehow, there are people not only from
the past, but from today’s age, that think human experimentation is
a 'necessary evil' and is for the benefit of future generations
(Hamblin). These people defend that it has helped advance our medical
field and teach us the right ways in order to treat diseases, care
for wounds, operate on a patient, prevent hypothermia, etc. In
essence, human experimentation argued that way, is okay. In the case
of Nazi Germany it was found acceptable because they were so blinded
by their hatred for Jews that they felt what they were doing was to
better the world. It is unclear whether they ever felt sympathy for
the crimes they committed, but at the Nuremberg Trials many reported
regrets, but those may have just been their last desperate attempts
to avoid the death sentence. Another viewpoint is that these
operations will someday help in our future and our kid's futures and
then somehow we will all be better prepared for whatever ills may be
thrown our way. In this context then, that statement holds true.
Technically experimenting has advanced our world, especially in the
field of medicine. These
advancements, yes, have changed the lives of billions of people
around the world – Sometimes for the better, as in the case of
finding a cure for malaria and other epidemic diseases (Veracity).
However the fact remains that there are more positive alternatives
and we must carefully examine them because these problems are still
existent today.
In fact,
we may be severely underestimating the amount of people in this world
that find human experimentation acceptable and may even still
practice it. Dozens of articles can be found on recent and even
current cases occurring. In 1965, which was still only 47 years ago
The Department of Defense used human test subjects in order to test
the radiation of a VX nerve agent in Alaska. According to Native
American scholar Dr. Andrea Smith, “...
Alaska Native populations were ideal laboratories because they were
geographically isolated, and no scandals would come out because no
one knew what was going on there” (Hansen). This simply goes to
show that we are amazingly undereducated about how many things like
this still occur. Society is kept so in the dark as this continues on
right under their noses. Two other modern examples, occurring only in
the 1990’s reveal bone-chilling cases. The first of which took
place in Uganda. Doctors funded by the United States traveled there
with the task of treating the country’s HIV-infected women.
However, when they were there the doctors withheld the AIDS drug AZT
to all of the women, which left their unborn children unprotected and
at risk as well. In the other
case, Pfizer representatives traveled to Nigeria to test drugs on 200
children during a 1996 meningitis epidemic without their parents
consent; 11 died while others suffered mental retardation. When
Nigeria’s attorney general pressed charges, Pfizer hired
investigators to dig up any evidence of corruption against him to
pressure him to drop the case, according to U.S. cables leaked in
2010 (Hansen). Just because these cases that are kept from us are
not as severe as more infamous cases, such as the Holocaust; does not
make them any less important or devastating. Innocent lives are
being taken advantage of and it is sickening and wrong. There is one
particular life that was also taken advantage of that is important to
note when discussing human experimentation, consent, and all that it
encompasses. This one person’s name is Henrietta Lacks.
Henrietta Lacks was a woman living in
the ’50’s who suffered from cervical cancer. Looked at from one
viewpoint, it is possible to say Henrietta was a human
experimentation subject herself. From the opposing side, it could be
seen as doctors attempting to help her, and save her life and prevent
future cases such as hers. However, lines drawn tend to get hazy when
it cones to ethical issues. Technically Henrietta signed a piece of
paper giving permission to use her cells; but when she signed she was
only thinking about saving her children because the doctors told her
donating her cells would help them in the future. She had no idea her
skin would turn black as coal, and she would be in the most pain of
her life due to the doctors testing different treatment methods on
her. And then her cells became famous, were launched into space,
cloned, tested with nuclear radiation and so much more. Henrietta’s
cells became a huge part of history and advanced our medical fields
in ways we never imagined possible. But some would argue it was
without her consent. So does the fact that she advanced the medical
field compensate for her never knowing what they actually were doing
with her cells? It turns out to be a matter of opinion in the end.
The experimentation on humans without
their given consent is simply put, a crime against humanity. It has
given our world a dark and disturbing past that many choose to ignore
due to their own selfish ways; they feel no remorse and will never
know what those people suffered through leaving them obtuse and
close-minded to it all. Some may argue human experimentation is
ethical, but it is not. It is an insult to who we are and what we
stand for. We are taught the difference between right and wrong and
should know better. Even when the EPA paid volunteers to breathe in
concentrated diesel exhaust for up to two hours at a time, they
should have known better. Many of the participants were elderly, some
already had asthma and one woman was obese suffering with heart
problems (Ahlert). The EPA conducted this experiment knowing full
well what they were doing, and this was just in October of this year.
There is no way to say what the future holds and if the practices
will ever stop. However, we can only hope that with each passing day
more people begin to realize how many lives they alter for the worse,
and that there are other alternatives.
Works Cited
Ahlert, Arnold. "The EPA’s
Disturbing Human Experiments." FrontPage
Magazine.
FrontPageMag, 02 Oct. 2012. Web. 18 Nov. 2012.
Hamblin, Jacob D. "St. Cloud State
University." Library
Proxy:. ABC CLIO, 2005. Web.
18 Nov. 2012.
Hansen, Terri. "Unethical Medical
Experiments Still a Possibility, Experts Say."
Indian Country Today Media Networkcom
RSS. Indian Country, Mar.
2011. Web. 18 Nov. 2012.
"The History Place - Holocaust
Timeline." The History
Place - Holocaust Timeline.
N.p., n.d. Web. 18 Nov. 2012.
"Medical Experiments of the
Holocaust and Nazi Medicine." Medical
Experiments of the Holocaust and Nazi Medicine.
N.p., n.d. Web. 18 Nov. 2012.
"Nuremberg Trials." Nuremberg
Trials. The Library of
Congress- Military Legal Resources, 16 July 2010. Web. 20 Nov. 2012.
Portaluppi, Francesco, Michael H.
Smolensky, and Yvan Touitou. "ETHICS AND METHODS FOR BIOLOGICAL
RHYTHM RESEARCH ON ANIMALS AND HUMAN BEINGS." Chronobiology
International: The Journal of Biological & Medical Rhythm
Research 27.9-10 (2010):
1911-929. EBSCOhost.
EBSCOhost. Web. 18 Nov. 2012.
"Search Results for Human
Experimentation." Quotes.net.
N.p., n.d. Web. 18 Nov. 2012.
Veracity, Dani. "Human Medical
Experimentation in the United States: The Shocking True History of
Modern Medicine and Psychiatry." Human
Medical Experimentation in the United States: The Shocking True
History of Modern Medicine and Psychiatry (1833-1965).
Natural News, 06 Mar. 2006. Web. 20 Nov. 2012.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)