Hi pals,
Thanks for a good week--it was probably clear that I wasn't feeling all that great physically, but it helped a lot that class attendance was really good, and your food memoirs are OUTSTANDING--I've enjoyed reading all of them, and learning a little more about where my students come from.
Remember that your responses/comments need to be posted by 3 PM tomorrow, Friday, April 22nd. If you have issues or problems, let me know as soon as possible, and use your classmates as a resource, too.
Here's the prompt/assignment:
You've read a long, dense research article in Gastronomica (Randy Fertel's "The BP Oil Spill"; pp 24-31), and have watched Morgan Spurlock's documentary Super Size Me, both of which will be potential sources for Essay 2 (more on that later). You've also had a few opportunities to figure out some sort of opinion or critical analysis of these pieces, both of which present, in very different styles, an argument that concerns the overlap between food, and culture/society (you can refer to the Culture vs. Society post on this blog for clarification on this).
Your task now is to compare the arguments presented in each piece. Some facets to consider are governmental responsibility, corporate responsibility, and the effect of place/geography on food, tone, etc. (there are many more elements to compare, but I want YOU to come up with them--figure out what's most important or compelling in both of these pieces, then decide which engages you more as a scholar).
One paragraph that evaluates which piece argues its point more efficiently is all you need to write. Keep in mind that your paragraph, just like the sources, needs to present some sort of argument, even if that argument is as simple as "Spurlock's argument is more convincing and better-presented than Fertel's for the following reasons..."
Although your opinion should figure into this, I'm not asking for a personal response, but rather an evaluation based on both men's research, and the way they deliver their findings.
E-mail me with questions, refer to the handouts in the Course Reader that you were assigned this last week, use your best grammar, punctuation, and formal writing style.
Good luck, and happy Friday to all!
Spurlock's piece about McDonald's food is a stronger argument than Fertel's BP Oil Spill. It's because Super Size Me is a visual representation of how bad fast food is for you, and how its fattening America. I believe that the argument surrounding fast food and McDonald's is a strong argument seeing as it draws me in more than Fertel's article. Something you see happening is always going to draw you into the objective more than reading a bland dry article about the oil spill. Furthermore, watching videos are always more fun than reading articles.
ReplyDeleteKevin Lui
8am Eng 102 :D
There was a lot of information in both Randy Fertel's article and Morgan Spurlock's documentary. There was a lot of sources, facts, and statistics presented by both of these pieces. However, Spurlock's documentary argues his points more affectively that Fertel. In the documentary, “Super Size Me” there are a lot of different doctors, lawyers, and other professionals that give their expertise on obesity and fast food companies. The most prominent reason for me that this documentary is a better example is due to the fact that Spurlock is actually taking place in the experience. Fertel only gave information from other people and facts of the past, he was not particularly there for the experience first hand. Spurlock looked at the situation from more perspectives and got different viewpoints on the situation. He talked to schools, fast food chains, employes, citizens, all sorts of people. There were many ways that you could look into this experiment and he covered most of them in the documentary. The fact that Spurlock captured his arguments on video also has a stronger effect on most people than a written article. This day and age, TV is far more used than reading. Therefore, the documentary would be more likely to be seem by a vast majority of people over the article of Fertel's. When viewers can see the effects taking place in front of their eyes it adds a sense of validity to the truth value of the argument. Overall, Spurlock's documentary successfully portrays its arguments far better than Fertel's article.
ReplyDeleteDesirea Jensen
English 102 - 8 A.M.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteBoth arguments from Randy's and Morgan's are very sharp and urgent. They both catch the popular attention, raise our concerns about what we've been ignorant about, and make big wake-up calls for us who actually have read and watched those. Randy's article seems to revive the splendid past of how rich and diverse the delta was such as how plentiful the local dishes were. By drawing and comparing the picture of the past and the current picture, he successfully brings us to the point that we need to care more about the environment surrounding us. But Morgan's documentary is likely more effective because of the way he puts himself into the McDonald's food test. That is more real and direct. By doing putting himself at risk, he effectively points out the fact that they food companies are not changing the way they run their business. We ourselves are the ones need to change our unhealthy eating habits because at the end of the day we are mostly responsible for our choices. The government and other agents might also take responsibilities, but it doesn't change much of that we eventually are going to be facing the consequences by ourselves if we are not well aware and take actions for now.
ReplyDeleteThanh Tran (English 102 8am)
"Super Size Me" video is more effective than the article,"The BP Oil Spill". Both provide credible sources. However, the difference is that the article provides sources in paragraphs and "Super Size Me" video provides sources through visual aids. Most of the time, pictures give stronger impressions to people more than paragraphs do. Also, in the video, many professors and other professional people help us to see more easily what the key point is and make us more easily agree with them than sources that are in paragraphs do. Both the article, ""The BP Oil Spill" and "Super Size Me" provide a lot sources that we can trust however, the video provide stronger sources than the article does through visual aids and expertises that support their argument and make it strong.
ReplyDeleteName : KyungSub Kim
ENG102
8 A.M Class
Both of these pieces have a well sought out base of credible sources to back what each argument is. The BP oil spill article is far more scholarly although told through the perspective of someone with deep ties to the region. Spurlock's film definitely takes some hard data, but conveys it in a pulpy way to try to be as understandable and as entertaining as possible to a broad base audience. It is hard for me to consider which is a superior work, because I don't know what are the qualifiers. More people have seen Spurlock's film as those who have read the BP article, although the article hits harder with data, rather than with play. The political and social implications from both works, are too grandiose to articulate critically within one blog summary. It would take me several paragraphs to detail the strong and weak analysis of both works.
ReplyDelete'Bo' John McClung
10am class
Two authors use different ways to express their arguments. While in the BP oil spill article, Randy Fertel used his sense of writing composition to inform the reader about the difficulties for people in Plaquemines Parish after the BP oil spill, Morgan Spurlock made a documentary film to show the bad effects of fast-food on people's health. Both pieces used credible sources but Supersize Me analyses the issue in the more scientific way. Morgan used himself as an experiment rat, through the figures and data from the doctors, measurement devices, science reports and interviews; he successfully prove the impact of McDonald food on people. On the other hand, Randy argument seems to be more subjective. He used his own knowledge and memories as the sources. Even though he used some credible sources and conducted some interviews, he didn't approach the issue in many aspects. Therefore, his argument is not as persuadable as Morgan's. Moreover, Morgan used the more effective mean of media to communicate with the audience. His movie is kind of a comedy and daily film of his life, that makes people likely to agree and believe in his argument. Randy's article is more scholarly so it become unfriendly to most of the readers. To sum up, the Supersize me movie has a stronger argument than the BP oil spill article.
ReplyDeleteTue Tran
ENG102 - 8AM
There are a lot of information that the readers/viewers need to “swallow” while reading/watching ( respectively) both Randy Fertel’s article and Morgan Spurlock’s documentary , however , I personally believe that Super Size Me Documentary is more effective than the BP Oil Spill article due to some of the following reasons: First of all, the video about McDonalds is more interesting to watch than reading a dry piece of writing like BP Oil Spill even though it takes more time to go through. The second thing about the BP Oil Spill is that this piece of writing tell too many unnecessary details at the beginning and doesn’t get to the main point until perhaps ½ of the piece. Comparing to the BP Oil Spill, Morgan Spurlock’s documentary go straight to main point and then gives out arguments and proofs for each of them. All the arguments in Super Size Me are focusing to one main , big idea about fast foods being bad while it is really hard to find the main arguments in Randy’s article. However, Morgan’s documentary shows some flaws that the audience could debates on, like whether McDonald’s is really the one to blame for obesities around the US ( and some parts of the world) or not , since people could choose to walk away , not eating their products or eat just enough. But overall, Morgan’s documentary has higher effectiveness rate than the Oil Spill article since it success in making people engage with the contents of the movie by making the audience watch his footsteps, “live” his life all over again rather than reading a secondary piece of writing that is so boring ( that I could fall asleep at any time while reading it).
ReplyDeleteName : Phuong Ngoc Dao
Class : ENGL&102 - 8am
I Believe Randy Furtel’s paper was more convincing than Morgan Spurlocks documentary. Spurlock discredits himself by going for too much shock value. He says every statistic like it’s a profound discovery and condescends to us even more by putting flashy animated visuals and sound effects. Most of his film consists of goofy music and footage of overweight people. There is one scene that I find particularly offensive. Spurlock is sitting in a kitchen, a smug look on his face, and an extremely overweight human being walks behind him. It was extremely rude and pointless, but he got a cheap laugh. Furtel’s paper was a very dry read but I found it to at least be honest. He gives a good history of the area’s agriculture and history. That made me sympathize with people hurt by the BP Oil Spill. Spurlock’s film will give you opportunity to laugh at other’s misfortune and feel embarrassed to live in America. Furtel’s piece actually serves the purpose of helping you understand a situation.
ReplyDeleteSpurlock's argument is more convincing and better-presented than Fertel's for the following reasons: He uses experts, like doctors and lawyers, to prove his points. His extensive interviews with the public, and the fast food franchieses support his claim well. And finally, not only does he research his topic well, but he used himself as a--Lab Rat to show his audience what effect a fast food diet has on the human body. I really don't know what Fertel was doing! His argument was factual but so that I couldn't even follow what he was doing.
ReplyDeleteGenel Perkins
English 102-8AM
Spurlock's documentary states its point much better than Fertel's article. Fertel's article discusses things I know nothing about and he gives no meaning to, like fishing and farming. Super Size Me discusses fast food, which not many people really need to have spelled out to them, but when it gets in-depth into things like nutrition, money spent on advertising, health effects, and so on, everything is very well explained to the common person. This makes an argument a lot more effective because it gets across more easily to more people. Also being an entertaining documentary instead of a boring article with uninteresting maps and charts probably doesn't hurt it very much.
ReplyDeleteAlex Beard
10AM
Shauna Starcher
ReplyDeleteI really realy enjoyed the essay, but that being said, the documentary was more convincing. It was more convincing partly because it relates to city-dwellers, which is most of Americans, and it also is more universally recognized as an argumentative peice. It is also more interesting because it doesnt give us a clear idea of how to solve the problem, it merely states what the problem is. Supersize me is also more effective because of the overall visuals, and what came out afterwards. Later, after the documentary was released for awhile the girlfriend, the vegan chef ended up selling a book on the detox diet she had put him on. So it obviously got more response to it overall.
Whose argument is more efficient, Spurlock’s or Fetel’s? “Efficiency” is a very specific quality to look at in an argument. I find that both of their arguments are relatively “efficient” regarding their strategies for impacting their intended audience. Super Size Me’s arguments are, I believe, more efficient in reaching a mainstream (or at least close to mainstream) audience who make their decisions “from the gut.” Most “lay” people today seem to make their choices based on the conditioning they receive through visual input. “The BP Oil Spill,” on the other hand, constructs its arguments to reach a more educated audience. It also aims for what seems to be a more ambitious goal analytically. Weighing the various complicated factors affecting the Plaquemine ecosystem is intellectually more complicated than arguing “fast food is bad for you.” Because Fetel attacks his mission with thorough care and insight, I feel his argument is more efficient as an intellectual inquiry. Spurlock’s argument is more accessible, and therefore more efficient as a vehicle for shifting mass opinion and decision-making. Both seem to be essential components of creating social change.
ReplyDeleteNoam Gaster
10 a.m.
In Super Size Me, Morgan did a better job of convincing his point than the BP spill. In super size me, the story and the effect of food was straight forward and was easier to related to because fast food is all around me which help me connect with that story more. Before coming to the document, I was already convinced that fast food was unhealthy, but the way document presented was so significant to reaffirm my view. The document show how quickly the fast food was damaging, much more than I had imagined. While the BP was significant disaster, the story of people being affected was real. The author didn’t provide a good enough detail for me to leave a strong enough impression
ReplyDelete(Van Nguyen-10am)
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI strongly believe that the movie "Super Size Me" is much more effective than the dry article "The BP Oil Spill". Generally, a movie is more likely to draw attention of the audience rather than the article with a vast amount of necessary data. Moreover, Morgen underwent the experiment first hand of how McDonald's effects people's health, which provides the audience with a better imagination of the issue. The movie also covers a lot of information from a various doctors, experts as well as the lawyers from different perspectives, whereas, the article includes only the facts with unnecessary data, which make the readers get bored easily and it lowers the effectiveness as well.
ReplyDeleteHa Vu
10am
After reading Fertels article on the BP oil spill and watching Spurlock's documentary on Mcdonalds food, Spurlocks argument is presented in a much better way. Although both of the pieces were very informational, The documentary was more engaging. Fertel gives us a long backround on his family history, where as Spurlock just gives us the information we need to know about him that is relevent to his experiment. Spurlock also only presents facts that pertain to the subject, and Fertel overloads the reader with unneeded facts. When reading Fertels article, I found it to have many grammatical errors that made it very frustrating for me to focus on the article itself. Having a video form of this might have been more engaging, as Spurlock did. Overall, Spurlocks way of presenting the argument and facts to back up that argument were more effective.
ReplyDelete*Sasha Simpson-8AM*
Daniella Bayley
ReplyDeleteENG.102 10 AM
Overall both Morgan Spurlock’s and Randy Fertel’s investigative pieces produced solid information and background on the issues discussed. While both chose different forms of expressing their arguments, one through film and the other through an article, both authors expressed strong opinions and views on how they felt about the topics presented. Both pieces had strong sources, which the authors used efficiently to back up their arguments. Overall I had a stronger understanding and appreciation for the information presented in Spurlock’s film and therefore would deem it the more effective lens to argue positions on issues such as obesity. When reading Fertel’s article I struggled with the writing style and the dryness of the piece. Through Spurlock’s film I was able to have a strong understanding about the piece without struggling nearly as much. Spurlock used language that was easy to comprehend and showed his audience what he was presenting instead of just telling his audience, as seen in Fertel’s piece. While both can be used as excellent secondary sources, Spurlock’s film would ultimately be a lot more easy to use as a source because the information presented is much easier to absorb and use to your advantage.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThe traditional cultures is changed and the society is formed forcefully by some busines' owners who put their profits above the environment and society which are presented in both Spurlock's documents and Fertel's research essay.While Fertel gently describes carefully
ReplyDeleteabout local people' live around the contaminated Gulf, how they suffer from the falling down era of restaurant businesses and explains how the cultures changed with a melancholy and mild tone, Spurlock offensively shows images of fat people as an ultimate evidence of eating fast food.His girlfriend even freely talks about their private sex life, the documents are full of scary picture. Some of the pictures have Jesus as a cartoon character among fast food, which may become offensive to religious people. Even though I find they are offensive pictures, comments and ideas which were presented on the video,I think that the document is more persuasive than Fertel's essay. Therfore, it successfully use the strong voice to alert people of their healthy condition. It certainly NEEDS to use strong voice to talk about economic affect if we want to stop its negative expansion.
Spurlock's documentary on the fast food industry (mainly McDonald's) seemed more argumentative than Fertel's article on the BP oil spill. It was more clear to me what Spurlock was trying to prove, and why it was so important to get the message out about the uprising epidemic of obesity. Spurlock not only did his research by meeting with producers in the fast food industry, but also interviewed the consumers as well. Going on a 30 day McDonald binge was brave and risky, but it gave the viewers a more hands on approach than just reading about it in an article. Whereas Fertel used a more personal and emotional approach to raise the issue of instability in Louisiana and Mississippi due to the oil spill and post- Katrina, Spurlock involved us and grabbed our attention by providing a hypothesis, testing it, gathering data, and providing us with a conclusion right before our eyes.
ReplyDeleteRandy Fertel’s article and Morgan Spurlock’s documentary ,The BP Oil Spill article and Super Size Me documentary were nice but I prefer the documentary one, because seeing and reading will give you two understanding. I am a visual learner and I understand the whole point of the video than reading the article. In the reading part they only tell what is going on, and the documentary part they tell and show you at the same time and it makes sense. For example in the documentary, the two teen age girls sue McDonald with written and they fail, but if they could have a video and take to the court it may help and they will not need to find any other witness to help them that McDonald’s food made them like the way they are. Spurlock's argument is more convincing and better-presented than Fertel's BP oil Spill article.
ReplyDeleteAwes Hassan
8 AM
I personally believe that Morgan Spurlock's documentary/experiment was informative and entertaining it kept my attention and I left feeling like I never wanted to eat fast food again. "Super Size Me" a film that portrayed American society as unhealthy. Morgan Spurlock's attempt at proving that eating only Mc Donald's would be harmful to his health and that being overweight was unhealthy. The documentary also used legitimate sources to prove his point and expose corporate marketing practices which con people into buying into the idea of convenience and "luring" children into there establishments by creating a family friendly environment. I only wish the article on "The BP Oil Spill..." contained a more interesting angle. Honestly I did not feel connected to the author and I feel the piece did not completely engulf me with enough information about the actual effects of the spill and the piece was a little scattered and dull for me to actual gain any type of interpretation.
ReplyDeleteFertel talked about the oil spill in louisiana and missisipi and fast foods takeover was more compelling to me becouse the "victims" seemed powerless while in supersize me the purchesors of Mcdonalds food enjoy the product. Spurlock's used film and hard hitting techniques e.g. spotlighting fat people and his own healths decline. Spurlock used stronger methods to get his message across and showed how much he cared abought his subject by becomeing a minor legue marytre. Fertel's article was effective at teaching you abought his subject through charts and data but seem's to fail to grab an individuel who dosn't have predisspossed curiosity unlike supersize me.
ReplyDeleteI find that both arguments both work, and catch the viewers attention, however, I find that the movie "Super-Size Me" did a better job in presenting the dangers of the topic (Fast food) compared to the way Fertel's presented his topic (The BP Oil Spill.) I found that it was much easier to Relate to Morgan's movie because I myself have eaten fast food, and it is all around us. While Fertel's topic can be seen as equally important, I didn't quite have the same direct feeling of impact. The fact that the fast food restaurants try to manipulate the menu to attack certain age groups and certain "classes of citizens" was appalling. I cannot believe how concerned these businesses are to do everything in their power to get people to buy their product, apparently at any cost.
ReplyDeleteRory Ferguson
English 102
10am
In the age of technology, I think that Morgan Spurlock's argument is more efficient, in terms of reaching a widespread, international audience because he conveys it through a documentary. On top of that, obesity has become a global epidemic that needs immediate attention. According to the WHO (world health organization), "[i]n 2008, 1.5 billion adults, 20 and over, were overweight. Of these, over 200 million men and almost 300 million women were obese." In addition to that, "65% of the world's population live in countries where overweight and obese kill more people than underweight." So, according to these numbers, I would conclude that, before we can worry about fixing other issues, the human race needs get off the path of self-destruction, especially since obesity is preventable. Yes we can go and try to change the concept of corporates, which is to become stinking rich, or we can simply change our demands to generate new supply. So unless we stop wanting those BicMac's, McDonald's will be happily supplying them to us. They are a Business!
ReplyDeleteNot to downplay the issue of restoring the wetlands though, down in the Mississippi Delta, I think both issues are cause for extreme concern, and are connected in the terms of, globalization, industrialization, and overpopulation.
I haven’t seen SSM (Super Size Me) in years, from what I remember Spurlock spends a month vomiting Big Macs, going to the doctor, and presenting facts alongside easy to understand animations. No doubt it was extremely amusing and easier to suffer through than say a book on the same subject. Both the article, “The BP Oil Spill…” (for short) and the movie, “SSM” are great vehicles for transferring information and what’s interesting is that whatever one of them lacks, the other has in droves. I personally don’t think that either subject is one that should be overlooked, nor do I think one should be deemed better than another. But what it comes down to is, convincing your audience that they should listen to (and eventually side with) you. And as far as that is concerned I would say Fertel trumps Spurlock, simply through the maturity of his argument. Nobody was surprised to find out that eating McDonalds for a month would have disastrous consequences on your body and mind. But it was entertaining to watch, and maybe we even learned a little bit… accidentally. But Fertel’s article was as you said, ‘very dry’, on top of being very difficult to relate to. However, he still did a better job presenting facts to back up a clear argument, and he actually taught me something, as apposed to simply entertaining me.
ReplyDeleteSamuel West
10am English 102
In my opinion the article is a painful read and if i were not forced to read it in its entirety i would have quit somewhere in the middle of the first paragraph. That being said, i am prone to siding with the witty, entertaining, pretty lights that were "supersize me" not to say that an essay cannot be equally entertaining-- but that article was one of the most boring pieces of literature i have ever laid eyes on. In my opinion it is a dated piece of informative writing in the sense that you have to keep the modern culture busy and entertained or you will lose them in the blink of an eye. Supersize me is an example of a modern media production designed to inform and entertain to maintain focus on it's message. which is something that i felt the essay did not accomplish-- i had to take breaks from it just to soak in the message.
ReplyDeleteErin DeWitt
ReplyDeleteEnglish 102 10:00 AM
Morgan Spurlock's documentary is a much more effective way to communicate the escalating problem that big business has become in recent years than Randy Fertel's PP Oil Spill article. The major factor in determining this, a factor which others can agree with, is how relatable Morgan Spurlock's topic is to the every day lives of people (including myself) through the techniques he uses to express his opinions. Every body in their lives has eaten fast food at one point in their lives, not everybody grew up fishing and harvesting ect, some of us have never even been to New Orleans. The BP article could have been communicated better by focusing on something everybody can relate to: Gas prices. If that is the focal piont, all of the major points that were made in the article would be completely assimilated because everybody has gone to the pump and screamed because of how high gas and oil companies are raising the prices. Morgan Spurlock took statistics and turned it into a relatable issue. This is why Morgan Spurlock's article is much better.
In the documentary "Supersize Me," Spurlock's argued that McDonalds and other fastfood restaurants are responsible for making US citizen the biggest or fattest people on Earth. On the other hand, The author Fertel of "The BP Oil Spill and the Bounty of Plaquermines Parish" article delivered a very discriptive history of the Parish and also parts of his personal childhood memoir. However, Spurlock's argument has a better approach to the audience than Ferel because Spurlocks demonstrated his argument by getting the public involved in vary places and showed the evidence in a film. While, Fertel's piece approached audience by explaining the condition of the land he once knew.Though Fertel's piece was very emotional, readers can't not truely feel or visualize the unstable land. But on the documentary, readers can see what Spurlock was arguing about because most of the people knew what McDonalds is and what hamburgers tasted like. In conclusion, I beleived that Spurlock argument is clearly understandable and the message is well recieved.
ReplyDeleteVan Teng
English 102
10:00 AM
I think that both pieces, Morgan Spurlock’s Supersize Me and Randy Fertel’s The BP Oil Spill and the Bounty of Plaquemines Parish, were strong in statistics and data pertaining to each. I find the more of the five senses that are triggered, the more of an impact of influence that is achieved. Either piece is full of information from many sources that touch on the topic deeply. Furlock’s piece, I believe, was the strongest; with the addition of auditory to the balance of information. To be able to learn information through media is an outstanding use of form. Supersize Me Touches a wider base of demographic on an almost international level as well. BP appears to focus on a demographic in a certain region, which limits the reader to specific knowledge.
ReplyDeleteMark G. 10am
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeletei believe that Morgan Spurlock's film "Super Size Me" is more effective than Randy Fertel's article "BP Oil Spill". the article is very informative and so is the film. the film is more effective because the disturbing images are embedded in our brains. the main reason the film is so effective is because a lot of people eat fast food and fast food restaurants are located all over the world. after watching Super Size Me it made me feel like i never want to eat Mcdonald's or fast food ever again, but after reading the article it didn't have any effect on me at all.
ReplyDeleteMellissa Wong 8AM
Both Morgan Spurlock’s Supersize Me and Randy Fertel’s The Bp Oil Spill gave really good arguments but Morgan Spurlock is more convincing. The reason for this is because even though both pieces have good reliable sources, the way it’s presented is different. In super size me documentary, the sources came along with visual presentations and interviews with people that wouldn’t just give biased information such as doctors, professors, etc. Also, Spurlock showed his experience from starting from the first day until his last day and we could clearly see the effects of the fast foods to him. I’m not saying that Fertel’s piece did not give good points and reliable sources but his article did not give as good as an impact in contrast to Spurlock.
ReplyDeleteArched Cabrera
10 AM
I feel that Morgan Spurlock’s documentary argument about obesity and fast food in America was far stronger than the BP oil spill article. I say this because of the interest factor of the film outweighs that of the article. Obesity is increasing which also means that the increase of weight gain diseases is increasing as well. With the help of Spurlock’s style of filming and with his incredible inclination of sources, we have and had a better grasp about what poor eating and fast food has done to Americans. since his documentary, i feel that we have come closer to a healthier country.
ReplyDeleteDylan Bachman 10am
Randy Fertel's oil spill article, although interesting, is harder for the mainstream to become convinced with as it has too many areas of research that the average person is unfamiliar with. This is apposed to Morgan Spurlock's Super Size Me which reached a wider audience with its familiar subject and easy to follow argument. It has an entertainment factor that was much more engaging than Fertel's constant bombardment of statistics and analysis. An argument is much more effective, I believe, when it is easy to follow.
ReplyDeleteAlex Pincus
10:00
One of the main theme in both Spurlock’s documentary Super Size Me and “The BP Oil Spill and the Bounty of Plaquemines Parish” article written by Randy Fertel is the cooperate responsibility . Both sources criticize about how big companies like BP or McDonald, directly or indirectly effect people’s health. However, the information and statistics in Spurlock’s documentary are more clear and relatable than that of Fertel’s as the incident of BP oil spill only has a narrow zone of effect; on the contrary, fast food – the main focus of Super Size Me –is a relevant subject to more people as we all have some contact to Fast Food one way or another. Another problem can be found in the Fertel’s article is the bias of the author. It seems that there are to many details about the author’s family incorporated in the article that make it more personal than it should be. Although it’s not a fair comparison, but as a visual source, the information in Spurlock’s documentary is easier to absorb for common audience, while the language used in Fertel’s article is more academically-oriented. That’s not to say Fertel’s article provides less convincing argument than Spurlock’s documentary; in fact, being published in Gastronomica – a scholarly magazine, the Fertel’s article can be a credible source for reference.
ReplyDeleteName: Dat Bui
Class: ENGL 102
Section: 10 A.M
Both the article by Randy Fertel and the documentary by Morgan Spurlock were extremely informational. However, I firmly believe that Spurlock's documentary presented a stronger argument than Fertel's article. Spurlock's documentary, "Supersize Me", was very intriguing because it was basically a wake-up call to all Americans. It was straight to the point. It showed how America is basically becoming really fat really quick, and pointing it out that we seriously need to change our ways and what we can do about it. All the information was strongly supported and valid. Also, it's a movie. It gave it's viewers a visual, which is more than just an article you read. These days, there is more interest in film than there is in reading. Fertel's article was extremely dry, and it probably doesn't capture enough attention to people to make them want to care.
ReplyDeleteAriel Rotz - English 102 - 8 A.M
"Super Size Me" and "The BP Oil Spill" both have enlightening, research backed arguments. Ultimately though, Morgan Spurlock's burger binge shines as the more compelling piece because it goes head first against the American fast food juggernaut McDonalds. Everyone recognizes the golden arches, the sight is nearly engraved in the American mind. To see the house that Ronald built come crashing down because of good research and reporting coupled with relatable presentation and the spectacle of Spurlock's stunt is much more effective than nearly any article in a magazine could attempt to be.
ReplyDeleteDavid Cook
10am
Studying “The BP Oil Spill and the Bounty of Plaquemines Parish” and Supersize Me lead me to conclude that both sources are representing different point views. Randy Fertel, the author of BP Oil Spill argues for the interest of BP, a multibillionaire company while Supersize Me tries presents the wrong doing of McDonalds, a multibillionaire company. For example, Randy Fertel makes BP’s spill insignificant by pointing to failures of the levees built by Army Corps of Engineer and the damage that brought to the parish. Unlike the article the movie does not lessen the health damage cause by McDonald’s products, but it brings out the danger of eating fast food. Also the movie goes further and gives credit to McDonald for causing Americans to be fat.
ReplyDeleteAhmed Siyad
8:00 am class
Boontu Mohamed
ReplyDeleteAs I took both of this peace of information The BP oil Spill article and the Super Size Me documentary more “attention-grabbing” and comprehensible argumentive. However, I believe that Spurlock’s documentary is more solid and effective than Fertel’s article because. Spurlock’s documentary contains a lot of statistics and visible facts that will capture our attention right away. For example, there are a lot of great scholars, like a doctors, lawyers and some other experts who were concerned about Fast food Nation and participated to talk about this concerns and we get to hear straight up from their perspective. Moreover, Spurlock also provided us with a very great example by modeling for us for 30 days just to show how harmful and effective it is to eat fast food daily. But on the over view, the BP Oil Spill does not provide additional information data that its audience/viewers can have the opportunities to understand it from different standpoint of view. So it is kind unbreakable to understand and appreciate it as well. As a result, i believe that Fertel’s argument is less privileged circumstances than Spurlock’s argument because, Spurlock’s argument is more reachable and easy to get to and also his documentary is productively presented.
Boontu Mohamed
English 102
8AM
Spurlock’s argument about fast food was more interesting and convincing then the BP Oil Spill article because Spurlock had more facts and it was visual and he went through the process physically which showed us a clear idea of what health issues fast food can cause. Fertel’s argument was factual but it was boring and hard to follow. Therefore I think Spurlock had a better, entertaining, and convincing argument.
ReplyDeleteI feel like the bp oil article provided readers with too many facts and indept explanaition that didn't quiet make sense unless its been analyzed really well. The super size me documentary, on the other hand, appealed to me more due to its relevent content of todays health problems. I find both very effective but the documentary was more interesting and engaging. I would say these two shouldn't be compared at all since they are opposite of one another. They are both effective when they are viewed in their proper category insteadof just viewing them as two.
ReplyDeleteSpurlock’s argument about fast food was more interesting and convincing then the BP Oil Spill article because Spurlock had more facts and it was visual and he went through the process physically which showed us a clear idea of what health issues fast food can cause. Fertel’s argument was factual but it was boring and hard to follow. Therefore I think Spurlock had a better, entertaining, and convincing argument.
ReplyDeleteKhadija Abdalla
Engl 102 10am
"Super Size Me" by Morgan Spurlock approached the issues of corporate, government and civic responsibility in a much more direct manner than Randy Fertel's "The B.P. Oil Spill and the Bounty of Plaquemines Parish". Spurlock's concise display of the vicious circle of poor health education, poor eating choices, corporate monopolies on government policies and public food options in the U.S. presented each sphere of responsibility. Fertel's article depicted the intertwined nature of the the B.P. Oil spill's effect on communities, culture and people. He had far fewer direct connections to the separate spheres of responsibility than Spurlock did. Fertel's article was a rather dry attempt at an emotional invested piece on the oil spill's effect on where he grew up, whereas Spurlock left his audience feeling emotionally, communally and perhaps politically charged in awareness of the issues he brought forth in his film.
ReplyDeleteRandy Fertel in his article The Spill and The Bounty of Plaqueminis Parish, and the Morgan Sporlock’s documentary, both have a lot of facts, information, and statistics. Nevertheless, Fertel’s article shows just information, and facts that was living for other people in the past and present time. He was not a witness of the experience that people live there, and neither was he not living any experience at there. Instead, Sporlock’s documentary is a strong argument about fast food industry in this country, and around the world. He pointed out how fast food is present in most of the places such hospitals, schools, stores and so on. Sporlock’s documentary “Super Size Me” is most effective because his argument is supported by prominent expert’s lawyer, doctors, and other professional who gives their opinion based in study about the contribution of fast food industry to the obesity on people who consumed fast food. One of the most important reasons that made this documentary effective is because it is not just information and facts, but it shows the reality of the effect that fast food caused on people who eat it. Moreover, Sporloock live his own experience to demonstrate how fast food affects the health of people throughout consumption even not for too long period of time. Besides, his experiment shows clearly how fast food is conducting people to suffer a lot of diseases for example, diabetes, high cholesterol, and hypertension and so on. This documentary “Super Size me” raise our concerns about what we have been ignored about fast food, and how it is dangerous for our health. Also, it called our attention to be aware of the consequences of the consumption of fast food cause in our body, and how it is reflected in our health. Moreover the documentary let us know about how fast food industry put our live in risk, and they do not care about customer and either they don’t show any interest in change the way they run their business in order to protect customer life. Also, we have to be aware of that fast food industry interest is to sell their product as much they can without any care for customer’s life. Besides, we can see even how the government does not have too much interest in their citizen health.
ReplyDeleteAna Valencia
English 102
I don't know how to caricaturization the both honestly. I feel asleep during the movie at home and I cant take much just from reading. From what I remember, Spurlock gave a more eiry version of what the uniter nation is enduring from the height or the fast food nation. I could identify more with Spurlocks finding rather than Morgan's, because I don't have much correlation with the south.
ReplyDelete