- She argues how, and only how genetically altered foods are bad. This is unfair to the other side as she makes no mention to how these genetically altered crops can be seen as a good alternative to high priced all natural foods and instead just argues that all naturally grown crops are the only ones that can be trusted.
- She uses scare tactics, using strong negative words such as destruction, death and disease and also makes the claim that genetically altered crops are “monsters”. In the fair summary she mentions how some people see many possible benefits from genetically engineering food.
- She uses words such as huckster, ignorant and uniformed to try and discredit her claims. She changes her description of her from huckster to advocate which lessens the negative impact towards her and also mentions how she warns against possible negative affects as opposed to the believed positive ones.
- Yes because when not mentioning opposing sides it makes the argument seem way to one-sided and can result in a negative effect and poor views on the author.
My New Blog
Just another Virginia Military Institute ePortfolio site
