After watching "Toxic Sludge is Good for You," write an essay that Identifies potential fallacies that are either 1) implied by the narrators of the movie about the arguments of other people or corporations or advertisers, etc; and/or 2) made by the narrators themselves in their own arguments.
You should explain how and why these are potential fallacies. Secondly, you may discuss whether public relations firms use propaganda to make their claims, and, if so, how - give specific examples of some of the techniques they use, and discuss whether any of these techniques are also propaganda techniques.
This material may consist of step-by-step explanations on how to solve a problem or examples of proper writing, including the use of citations, references, bibliographies, and formatting. This material is made available for the sole purpose of studying and learning - misuse is strictly forbidden.
Bad Arguments in the Documentary Toxic Sludge is Good for You
The documentary Toxic Sludge is Good for You is a 45 minute argument on how public relation firms manipulate news with propaganda and censorship techniques on behalf of large corporations in America. The documentary makes the assumption that public relation firms are ipso facto “influential but invisible” and that they conduct their activities behind the scenes with little scrutiny. We are meant to assume this is correct. Eric Sparling uses an “appeal to wealth” when he argues the corporation with the largest influx of cash is going to have more power, therefore “some voices will be louder than others”....
This is only a preview of the solution. Please use the purchase button to see the entire solution