Revised Introduction

In this blog post, I will write a completely different introduction than the one that I currently have.

I do think that the new introduction is successful because it has a more interesting opening sentence. However, I want to have the two paragraph introduction format, because I feel like it is more specific to the essay that I am writing. I will definitely change the opening sentence.

"Idea" (via Forbes). 

 New Introduction:

Would you still eat at your favorite restaurant if you knew that they were lying to you about what they put into your food? If you answered no, and Chipotle is your favorite restaurant, then you are in some trouble. In the article, "Chipotle is Being Sued Over Its Anti-GMO Advertising. Serves Them Right," the author, Alison Griswold uses rhetoric to convince the audience that the company deserves the lawsuit. She also criticizes the audience for avoiding GMOs, assuming that all of her readers think that they are bad.

Past Introduction (2 paragraphs):

Arguments in the field of Nutritional Science are always fueled by the latest breaking news, or fads of what to eat and what to avoid. The reason behind all of the arguments over what one should digest are all of the studies conducted by researchers, scientists, and universities. Rhetorically, authors who write in this discipline write articles that take a strong stance towards one side, and they can often leave out counterarguments. There is really no excuse for this, because you can find studies proving and disproving the safety of eating just about any food- except for things that the general public knows to be harmful (like eating swimming pool chlorine tablets).

In this instance, we will explore the rhetorical strategies used in an article about genetically modified organisms (GMOs). A GMO is a food that was not grown “naturally.” Instead of collecting seeds occurring naturally from a plant, the plant is modified in a lab. GMOs can also include animals, like a chicken or cow. The purpose is to grow food that is bigger, grows faster, and can be grown less expensively. Some view this as “frankenfood,” while others see this as a way to feed our overpopulated planet. There are arguments for and against GMOs. For example, the FDA regulates GMOs, and they claim that all of the genetically engineered foods that they approve are safe for consumption¹. On the other hand, there are people who view GMOs to be unsafe for consumption- the majority of countries do not accept GMOs as safe².

In the article, “Chipotle is Being Sued Over Its Anti-GMO Advertising. Serves Them Right,” the author takes a crack at forcing a one-sided view on the reader, while also accusing them of fearing genetically modified foods. This is an example of how people in the field of Nutritional Science tend to write opinionated articles, without addressing the opposing argument. The author of this article, Alison Griswold, is a journalist for the website Slate. She writes for the “Business and Economics” section, but takes a focus on restaurants, food, and fast-food chains.