A Rhetorical Analysis Of An Anti-Littering Campaign

1112 Words5 Pages
This paper is going to tell people all about an anti-littering campaign. This campaign comes from the August of 2014 campaign through the City of Toronto’s Livegreen Organization. This essay will show everyone how this advertisement uses different appeals in order to make a difference. These appeals are known as ethos, logos, and pathos. This advertisement can make a difference if used in the right way and the right places. This picture depicts that of two pieces of trash lying on the ground, after not being properly disposed of. This advertisement catches people’s attention because of the state the world is in right now and with knowing how much people do not care about what they are doing to it. The two pieces of trash are an empty alka-seltzer…show more content…
The people of this organization used the trash of the area to create words like, “selfish,” “pig,” “dumb,” “lazy,” “dipstick,” and “lowlife.” There was a strong pathos argument using these words and how people should care about what is happening to their environment and that they should do something about it. Nobody wants trash talking about them, but it speaks for itself and it thinks they should care. The ethos used for this advertisement was the credibility of the picture, as well as examples of this picture being recreated with other pieces of trash to affect more than just one city, but maybe even the country as a whole. There was no logos argument, so instead, the argument made was against logic. The argument made was whether or not people would see this happen in a real life situation while walking down the road, sitting at a gas station, or even sitting at work or school. By making this argument, the conclusion made was that this does not logically occur on its own. Then the effectiveness and use of the advertisement itself was discussed. If used in the right way, it could be very effective in helping the planet. A healthy planet means a healthy
Open Document