Community Crime

The topic I have chosen for today’s post is something that affected my community and myself. A veterinarian was arrested for the mistreatment of animals in his care, keeping them locked in unclean cages and keeping a dog scheduled for euthanasia, who had a bone degenerative problem alive for blood transfusion. This interested me because I considered taking my dogs to that clinic before, but now I’m glad I decided against it. Animal cruelty and the treatment of animals has always been at the forefront of my mind because I have had pets for as long as I can remember and because animals can not speak up for themselves when they are being mistreated. I will be looking at two articles on this subject to analyze how effective each article at reaching their target audience.

I read two articles on the Camp Bowie Clinic, one by the New York Daily News “Texas vet arrested for animal cruelty denied medical care to his owndog, 4 other pets: police” and the other from the local newspaper The Star Telegram “Fort Worth vet arrested on suspicion of cruelty to animals”.

I read the Star Telegram article first. I thought the article was very informative. I felt that the information was so detailed because it was written towards the people in the Fort Worth community. The news directly affects them since this animal cruelty situation happened in the city they live in. The article had a lot of direct quotes form the accused vet, the nurse who accused him of animal cruelty, and patients who went to the clinic. I felt that the quotes help paint a full picture about what happened at the clinic and how people are reacting to the news that a trusted vet mistreated the animals under his care. The article gives it’s audience a general overview of the events that occurred at the clinic hitting on all the high points without bogging the reader down with heavy information and making them what to continue through out the article. This works in the articles favor because it breaks down into two sections focused on the vet and the patients, which gives a lot of emotional depth hearing the differing opinions about what happened. I also was very smart to have both sides directly compared because it reads that the article is not trying to sway your opinion on what happened by presenting you with all the evidence. I thought the article was very effective at targeting and reaching the local community in the article.

The other article by the New York Daily News is a national publication. The events that took place at the Camp Bowie Clinic shocked so many people that the news spread creating national interest. The article caters to its wide audience incredibly well. The article is filled with pictures of animals being rescued, sad depraved animals, and the accused vet. The pictures are very dramatic and strike at the heart of any person who has a slight inkling of care for animals. The writing of the article is filled with the grim details of how the animals were treated and the condition they were found in. the details made my stomach turn in horror, but the grimmer and more interesting the more people will read it. Because this is a national article the people reading want to be entertained by the news so they don’t get the big picture form the writing alone so the article gets creative. The article contains a local news video so that they reader can get back ground info quickly without having to read it. The video also adds to the informational background helping to fill the gaps of the very emotional writing. Though the article tries to be entertaining it still try to provide all the information it can by adding the link to the report filed against the vet, making this article successful in connecting with its national audience.

I think one way this type of animal cruelty can be prevented in the future is closer inspections by the state boards of veterinary medical examiners and more frequent checks on the hospitals and clinics. Another way this could be prevented is anonyms tip lines and privacy for the people presenting accusations of abuse because one of the problems the nurse had with coming forward is she was afraid of the repercussions. I also think proof of euthanasia presented to the owners so that they know that their pets have been treated.

            The last thing I want to talk about is the class I wrote this blog for, my English class Crimes Against Nature. Before I really did not care much about the environment unless it directly affects animals, plants don’t really interest me. This class helped me understand that problems with the environment effect not only animals but myself as well. Not only did this class teach me about the environment but also it helped my writing and the understanding of all types of rhetorical documents, from scholarly articles to movies and websites. It was a very eventful fulfilling class.

The Environmental Website

When looking at environmental organizations websites are a big way of engaging with the people that the org wishes to involve in their cause. Done successfully websites can effectively lead the researcher to key information about their org and have a stimulating enough web page to entice people to donate or volunteer. I decided to look at three different websites and analyze how effectively (or ineffectively) their websites are at enticing and effectively communicating to people of the digital age. The three websites I will look at are the pages of the DFW Wild LifeCoalition, the Fort Worth Audubon Society, and Air North Texas.

While looking at these websites I looked at the aesthetics of each page. I found that the DFW Wild Life Coalition was very, for lack of a better word, bland. It was beige and green, while the lettering was very small causing me not want to read what they had to say. My first thoughts on the webpage were that it looked like the endangered animal website I had to make when I was in middle school, not very appealing. The next website I looked at was the Fort Worth Audubon Society. This on was far more appealing with is large “Welcome!” in neon green. Though the website is mostly white it has enough pictures to make it not loo so dull, the only thing I thought was off putting was the black banner at the top of their site that had there name in the corner. It was like a black cloud on an other wise sunny website, it made the feel of the website dark seeing is how it's the first thing you look at before you scroll down to the more uplifting part of the website. The last website, Air North Texas, was the most modern of the three with color blocking and easy maneuverable flow of the eye around the page. The colors were bright but muted so not to be overwhelming and the web page was so crisp that you could print it off and use it as a pamphlet or magazine insert.

When I was looking at these websites I was also reading a chapter form the book Organizational Rhetoric: Situations and Strategies by Mary Hoffman. In the book she uses a phrase call “the strategic use of symbols to generate meaning” (Hoffman, 3). These websites use this technique in there websites.

The DFW Wild Life Coalition on their page have four pictures of animals that can be found in the DFW area, a bird, a rabbit, a turtle, and a bee. Once clicked on these symbols gives a list of common concerns about each animal. These pictures represent the animals this origination wishes to protect and to educate the web audience that the animals they overlook may need assistance. Other symbols this website uses are the symbols of Facebook and Twitter. They generate the meaning that they wish to share their cause through your concern so you tweet or share it to help get their message out. Though one thing bout this symbol is that it does not look like you could actually click on them and they would work. The Facebook and Twitter symbols look copy and pasted to the website, they don’t look like links they just look like reminder that you can tell people about their org on your social media.

 Fort Worth Audubon Society did a great job of getting their message across through symbols. There are pictures of birds every were on their page so that automatically I understand their main cause is birds. The other thing they do is have a calendar with events so the public can see what they are doing and how active they actually are which is nice because if I wanted to swing by one of their events to see them in action I know where to be and what time. One message, besides that they are all about birds, is that they really want you to donate and pay to become a member of their cause. Right under there logo and next to their “Welcome!” they have two credit card capable boxes, one that asks you to donate and the other asking you to become a member, with the credit card they take right under them. At least they’re up front about it. The one symbol I thought they need was something linking them to social media. There was nothing I could share, tweet, or pin. I think the compromised by putting a thread board were people can post links and talk about their feathered cause.

The last website, Air North Texas, was filled with catch phrase after catch phrase in stylized front and pretty colors. Phrases like “Be Air Aware” or, their slogan “Go Green Breath Clean”, symbols used to stick in your mind so I a very catchy manner can make you remember what they are all about. They also use symbols that have become cliché but still work if your just looking at a website for five seconds, like the symbol of parent and child as the ones affected by air pollution. We all care about the child and what pollution is doing to him and if that pollution kills the parent who will look after the child. Cliché symbols can be very affective because the automatically engage your audience. This site also has a video that has symbolism in it though having the actor play every day people letting their cause about air seem more relatable. The only thing this website does not have is the social media connection that could spread there cause to friends of friends of friends.

Though each website is different and has strengths and weakness I think that they all accomplished getting their message and cause out to an audience that most likely skimmed their page.

Work Cited

"Chapter 1: Organizations and Rhetoric in Contemporary Culture." Organizational Rhetoric: Situations and Strategies. Eds. Mary F. Hoffman and Debra J. Ford. SAGE Publications, Inc., 2010: 1-22. Print.

Always Research is a Good thing

      While researching material for a paper I am writing for the film, Wall-E, my teacher my class an assignment to read and article, by Luis A. Vivanco called "Seeing Green: Knowing and Saving the Environment on Film," hoping that it could be useful in our papers. More evidence is always welcome when making a claim.

      When I started reading this article I was worried if this would actually benefit my paper. Vivanco is analyzing documentary films which are vastly different from my animated family movie, or so I 

thought. As an anthropologist, Vivanco, looks at how things effect a people group and their influences on a particular society. This ideology is very different from environmentalists who is critiquing the movie on it's truth to the cause it is depicting. Vivanco takes a look at how these documentaries influences the public by the techniques they might use and means of story telling that occurs in these films and those topics can transcend the borders of genre.

      One of the things said in this article stuck me in how well I felt it could relate to my paper despite the fact that the author was talking about animal nature films. "…kinship relationships, in which culturally preferred notions of monogamy, responsible parenting, industrious work ethic, deferred gratification, and the sexual division of labor are presented." I thought it was interesting how in a movie that might have been about lions in Africa was filmed and narrated in a way that the audience could recognize the family and society structures in their lives. Which is something I think the movie Wall-E does in depicting a very human-like life as well as behavior for machines.

      Another thing that struck me in this article was "…scientific validity of films relies on perceptions of the film maker's virtue and integrity." I thought this was interesting because it's true. In a movie like Wall-E the science is often over shadowed by the story that takes precedence over any bigger picture. The science shown to the viewers is often taken at face value because in a situation like where the environmental element is just a means to tell a story we have to believe that the science behind the story is correct.

     The last thing i thought could relate to my paper was "…audiences do not respond well to pessimistic 'doom and gloom' scenarios." Which I think is very relevant to a family movie where the audience is children and their parents. the environment message maybe toned down from the intense fear that waste product by humans can destroy a planet to properly tell a story about the love between two robots.

     After I read the Article by Vivanco I looked at his extensive list of sources and came across an article by William Cronon, "A Place Stories: Nature, History, and Narrative" which by skimming I think takes about how people write about nature and since Wall-E is a narrative story might be useful to my paper. 

Fern Gully: Analyzing the Undertones of a Children's Movie

When I was a child I saw cute animated movie about a magical rain forest were fairies and animals were living in harmony until, a giant machine with the help of these humanized smog cloud came and started destroying the place they live. So that the combined efforts of fairies, animals, and a magical shrunken human they set out to save their habitat. That is the movie “Fern Gully: the Last Rain Forest” and it is a campaign for the save the rain forests and the animals wrapped up and presented as a cute happy, slightly dramatic, children's animated movie.

In the trailer posted, you hear a generic movie voice man giving the narration to the images of rain you believe in the night sky. His slightly out of monotone soothing voice piques our interest into what we are being shown. He mellow tone tells us about nice song filled world without humans that is until now. The dialogue of the introduction is giving off the feel that you're peeking into world that exists all around you.

            The trailer then goes on to introduce the main characters of the story to forge a bond with the audience to its leads, Krista and Zach. After reading the story’s Romeo and Juliet they are greeted to a friendly animal companion voice by the unmistakable superstar of the 90s Robin Williams, America's favorite comedian. Then introduces the conflict of the machine and villainous smog, but only for moment. Because the audience has to know that everything is going to be all right good does prevail, I mean it is a children's movie.

            This movie trailer does a great job of hiding its intended to children. It never directly tell the audience that the humans are to blame it gives them the honest human eyes pollution to fear and distracts them from reading too deep songs and magic. It gets the “save the rain forest” campaign across about even saying it. We need to save Fern Gully; wait isn't Fern Gully in the rain forest. I can't say this movie doesn't work. It is a very good job of slipping in green thinking to children. I know I saw the movie as a child and was devastated by what was happening to the fairies and in turn making me more environmentally conscious. It wasn't till I was older and re-watched the movie that I picked up on the subtleties.

Lorax Approved?

When I read the article “ ‘The Lorax’: in Thneed of Some Marketing Help”,by Kate Sheppard, I thought it was a very tasteful article about how Hollywood for advertisers and promoted that might necessarily fit the movie image and what the movie is trying to promote. I wrote in a way that was not laced with anger and demeaning comments that can be a little off-putting when reading about a movie aimed at children. Very calm way presenting the facts and addressing her opinion in a tone that convinced me to continue to read and hear what she was trying to get across to the audience. The whole time I was reading it never felt what she was pressing an agenda that made it feel like I could reason with what she was saying income to the conclusion that I felt the same way. I enjoyed how she said she liked “The Lorax” but she was confused about the kind who partnerships universal chose to make. Like with Mazda who offered incentives to schools in which the school would receive $25 for every child that ask their parents to test drive. I also like how she made parallels to real life situations and situations in the movie to show how hypocritical a movie studio can be. When in the movie the Lorax was used to sell the very product that was ruining his home and in real life the Lorax was being used to sell “green” household cleaning products. Also, she ended her paper with a humorous and uplifting quote about a child being able to see through the marketing by saying “the Lorax doesn't even drive a car.”

Being Green

I read an article called "Save the World in 2014: Don't Go Shopping", Jennifer Amanda Jones, online about charity products and campaigns like the ethos water at Starbucks and the win one give one campaign by Betty Crocker.

I thought the article raise some interesting points about the charity campaigns. The article takes a very aggressive stance against those types of campaigns trying to relate the idea of a bigger picture by vaguely discrediting them. The author tells you the campaign" might " have hidden agendas or that the money they give is not worth the damage the product contributes to the bigger global problem. Jones then turns the burden to the audience by letting the reader know that is our responsibility to make the right choices, the right choices being investing our money in something other than a three dollars bottle of water. I think she raises interesting points but I feel a little like I’m being lectured for misbehaving.

You can always check out the article for yourselves:

Save the World in 2014: Don't Go Shopping

After my death into the green thinking I read an article “ Little Green Lies”, by Ben Elgin, to get submerged into the hot topic of companies going “ green”

This article has started off as a story of man having a green company that ran us ran on solar and water turbine power, but as his schemas are grew the idea of a totally green company became less like a possibility. The interim had me hooked I could understand this man’s struggle. Having a great idea and having it work in theory and in the real world, but at a little pressure and it all comes crashing down. I can understand the, I can relate to him even though I have never thought of running a green ski resort. The emotional aspects of seeing your dreams not pan out is something I understand, which persuades me to take a more sympathetic view on why green energy can’t be cost effective and helpful to the environment. I was totally engaged and hooked onto what I was being sold then…I got statistics. It was like a light switch all emotions and method turned off so I could read some numbers about how much a company was claiming to do for the environment. My mom wasn’t old logic mode reading stats and comparing companies then the mountain ski resort stars turned again. This pattern continued throughout the rest of the article, it was like having a whiplash from my right and left sides of my brain the point where I stopped caring. My brain was tired of going from the emotional psychological in 0.001 seconds. When the writer didn’t have the two together I was at a point where it didn’t matter I had already checked out.

I thought the style of the article could have been great. Start your reader off of the story, throw them a few facts, and tied them together quickly and go from there with the rest of your argument. With a solid base and the emotional and logical then I’ll trust your argument because it’s not soulless numbers after percent or overly emotional baseless statements. You have a whole well paced argument. I would say there were good points but honestly I can’t figure out how it all tied together.

If you want to figure out to check it out:

Little Green Lies

Works cited:

“ Little Green Lies-Businessweek.”    Elgin, Ben. Businessweek.com. N.p.28 October 2007. Web. 21 January 2014.

“Save the World in 2014: Don't Go Shopping." Jones, Jennifer Amanda. NPQ- nonprofit quarterly.com.N.P.15 January 2014. Web. 21 January 2014.