Ap lang food Inc logical fallacies 
Aamna Kidwai
10/12/2014
Ms. Reed
AP Lang
Truth or Fallacy?
The film, Food, Inc., argues that our food system has been corrupted by corporate interests; as a result, we are put in danger by very items that should guarantee our survival. We should reclaim our right to health by eating more locally produced organic food and ensuring all people have access to such food. The film wants the viewers to think negatively of the business of mass production of the foods that we eat on a daily basis. The logical fallacies allow the film to capture the attention and emotions of its audience by giving a reason for their concerns, but without any legitimate statistics or facts to back up their claims. The use of these logical fallacies in the film help strengthen its arguments by making the audience feel as if the corporations are exploiting the farmers and their traditions, causing families to go through avoidable obstacles, and making the companies and government look like the “bad guys” in this web that is called the food industry. However, the reality is that the food industry isn’t as evil as depicted by the fallacious arguments in the film.
To begin with, the film argues against the corporate interests and works to make its audience view the companies as exploitative of being the ones who are exploiting the farmers and taking them away from their traditions. For example, at one point, one of the farmers who was interviewed said, “theyThey not only changed the chicken, they changed the farmer...today chicken farmers no longer control their birds. A company like Tyson owns the birds from the day they are dropped off to the day they are slaughtered.” This statement makes companies like Tyson look like they are completely responsible for the way that farmers now farm and for the lack of control that a farmer has over the way that he choseschooses to raise his chickens. This logical fallacy doesn’t state how such companies control the chickens and how they have “changed the
10/12/2014
Ms. Reed
AP Lang
Truth or Fallacy?
The film, Food, Inc., argues that our food system has been corrupted by corporate interests; as a result, we are put in danger by very items that should guarantee our survival. We should reclaim our right to health by eating more locally produced organic food and ensuring all people have access to such food. The film wants the viewers to think negatively of the business of mass production of the foods that we eat on a daily basis. The logical fallacies allow the film to capture the attention and emotions of its audience by giving a reason for their concerns, but without any legitimate statistics or facts to back up their claims. The use of these logical fallacies in the film help strengthen its arguments by making the audience feel as if the corporations are exploiting the farmers and their traditions, causing families to go through avoidable obstacles, and making the companies and government look like the “bad guys” in this web that is called the food industry. However, the reality is that the food industry isn’t as evil as depicted by the fallacious arguments in the film.
To begin with, the film argues against the corporate interests and works to make its audience view the companies as exploitative of being the ones who are exploiting the farmers and taking them away from their traditions. For example, at one point, one of the farmers who was interviewed said, “theyThey not only changed the chicken, they changed the farmer...today chicken farmers no longer control their birds. A company like Tyson owns the birds from the day they are dropped off to the day they are slaughtered.” This statement makes companies like Tyson look like they are completely responsible for the way that farmers now farm and for the lack of control that a farmer has over the way that he choseschooses to raise his chickens. This logical fallacy doesn’t state how such companies control the chickens and how they have “changed the