Introduction:

Ÿ Attention getter: How many of you eat meat, or are not vegetarians? How many of you can say that you drink soda at least once a day?

Ÿ Well, for those of you who do eat meat, you’re not alone- so does about 99% of the American population. As for soda, it accounts for around 25% of all beverages consumed in the U.S. every year.

Ÿ Background: Lately, there has been a national spotlight on the importance of moderation in people’s diets

Ÿ Most of us can agree that eating meat probably isn’t bad for you, and that drinking soda once in a while isn’t going to affect your health.

Ÿ However, with the industrialization of our country have come new ways of providing consumers with these goods- and truthfully, the ways in which our foods are manufactured have become more and more mysterious with time.

Ÿ Thesis: In Fast Food Nation, author Eric Schlosser takes on the issue of the capitalization of the food industry, how it’s affecting people worldwide, and what can be done to ensure healthier lives here in America.

Ÿ I will begin my speech by telling you how I became interested in this topic, and then progress into why Schlosser decided it was important enough to publish a book on.

Situation:

Ÿ I originally read this piece in an English class focused on rhetoric, so I have become accustomed to thinking analytically about what I read.

Ÿ Additionally, I researched several newspapers, reviews and critic’s comments on Schlosser’s work to establish a more well-rounded analysis to present to you all.

Ÿ Obesity is a growing epidemic in America and it’s important to try to understand at least one reason that it is.

Ÿ I’ll explain why Schlosser believes obesity is such a serious problem that affects all of us, the exigence of his work, the constraints he faced along the way and the audiences he was trying to reach.

Exigence:

Ÿ Long before he became an author, Schlosser worked for a progressive magazine called “Atlantic Monthly.”

Ÿ He has written and received awards for several of his scholarly articles on social issues.

Ÿ Because he already had experience in the investigative journalism field, he was prepared to collect information first-hand, eliminating the middle-man.

Ÿ Fast Food Nation was written in 2001, a couple years prior to the boom in food industries towards healthy foods.

Ÿ As an investigative journalist, Schlosser became interested in America’s fixation with fast foods and wanted to alert the public to their dangers.

Ÿ Typical meals served at fast food restaurants are highly un-nutritional and are causing a wide-spread health crisis throughout the nation.

Ÿ This is something that Schlosser felt the majority of America was either unaware of, or didn’t really care about.

Ÿ Schlosser felt that Americans were incapable of slowing down and that this is probably one of the main reasons fast food became so popular.

Ÿ Prior to beginning his research, he observed the world around him and came to the conclusion that American’s unhealthy dietary habits were a result of corporate strangle-holds.

Ÿ To him, the culture and integrity of America was fading, and fast.

Ÿ After his book was published, a review from the New York Times said this: “Not only will it make you think twice about eating your next hamburger… it will also make you think about the fallout that the fast food industry has had on the social and cultural landscape.”

Ÿ It appears that his work has helped others to realize the severity of this situation, which was his main goal.

Ÿ In analyzing any piece, it’s necessary to consider the constraints put upon the author or speaker.

Ÿ Next, I will discuss those constraints Schlosser likely faced during the course of writing and publishing his book.

Constraints:

Ÿ Schlosser was limited by time, biased resources, lack of safe access to resources and editing constraints.

Ÿ As with writing any book, time is usually an issue and I consider this to be one of the author’s main constraints.

Ÿ As for biased sources, he was able to interview some industry higher-ups, but it’s likely that many of his interviewees weren’t completely honest.

Ÿ Schlosser had to let them know he was conducting research into their industry, and because of this, the CEO-types he interviewed often held back from telling him things which could hurt their image.

Ÿ In fact, after his book was published, the San Francisco chronicle said that it “was the stuff of a PR department nightmare.”

Ÿ Lack of safe access is another constraint.

Ÿ When he went to go visit food production facilities, he oftentimes wasn’t allowed inside, or wasn’t allowed to see the factory in its entirety.

Ÿ Also, Schlosser physically goes to a meat packing plant in the book, which is dangerous on a variety of levels.

Ÿ He had to make sure he remained as objective as possible to gather information untainted and earn the trust of the plant’s employees so they would give him more information.

Ÿ Lastly, when putting his book together, he had to really edit what was going to be included.

Ÿ He spent years gathering information, but he needed to figure out a way to include statistics and facts.

Ÿ But, he also had to make it easy enough to read that people wouldn’t be scared away by it.

Ÿ He uses a lot of humor, I think, for this reason.

Ÿ So now that we’ve talked about the importance of this issue and Schlosser’s constraints, let’s focus on who his audience was.

Audience:

Ÿ Seeing as Schlosser’s book covers a wide range of topics which are applicable to many segments of the population, he has several likely audiences.

1. The first, chronologically speaking, are activists and those who were already familiar with his previous work, because Fast Food Nation was his first book.

2. His second audience would be college students

Ÿ Fast Food Nation is commonly assigned reading in college level courses, being that it is an investigative, socially progressive work.

Ÿ Additionally, since our generation is the one which really experienced the boom of fast food chains, Ronald McDonald and so forth, he wanted to alert us while we are still young.

Ÿ USA Today supports this, saying that its particularly important for young people to read Fast Food Nation because:

Ÿ “it shows the unchecked power of multinational corporations,” as well as the importance behind making the right choice concerning what you put into your body.

3. His third audience is American parents.

Ÿ Adults have the money to spend on book and are more socially conscious.

Ÿ Knowing this, he directed his work toward them in part to make them see what is happening to their children, and also their peers.

4. Schlosser’s fourth and final target audience is big-name food processing corporations, the FDA and similar governmental agencies.

Ÿ He hoped to bring about enough of an outcry from the public from the information in his book to evoke a change.

Ÿ Now that we know Schlosser’s goals, constraints and his audiences, I’ll bring this speech to a close by reminding you of my thesis.

Conclusion:

Ÿ Industrialization of the food industry is a hotly debated topic.

Ÿ Schlosser believes this is the main reason fast food restaurants have flourished here, and hopes that through his book, Americans will come to realize how their products are affecting people negatively on a global scale.

Ÿ He used his own worries about the fate of our nation, his experience in investigative journalism, well-worked wording to target specific audiences and dealt with a variety of constraints to publish this piece.

Ÿ For my next speech, I’ll go into detail about what Schlosser found during the course of his research, in the meat packing plants.

Ÿ It might change your mind about the foods you eat and maybe what you think about industrialization.

Ÿ It affects us more than we know. Thank you.

Bibliography

Donahue, Deirdre. “Read this and you won’t want fries- or anything.” USA Today. 1 February 2001.

Roe, Andrew. “Mac, Jack Carl and Colonel Get Fried With the Facts: A journalist examines the real cost of fast food.” The Sanfrancisco Chronicle. 26 January 2001.

Schlosser, Eric. Fast Food Nation. Houghton Mifflin Books, 2001.

Severson, Kim. “A Food Crusader’s Alarm in Supersized.” The New York Times. 10 May 2006.

Comments

Michael Chiang: I thought your speech was great. Your pace and eye contact were both very good. Your transitions were very smooth, allowing me to know whenever you were switching from exigence, audience, and constraints. Good Job!

Alex: I also thought you're speech was really well-done. You're attention getter drew me in and you did a great job summarizing your main points. Interesting topic. Try and lighten up on the "umms" next time.

Derek: Your speech was great! The intro caught our attention, and your pace and projection were both right on, so good job there. The only thing that i can really critique was your usage of the filler "um" like Alex said, but that'll be an easy fix for the next speech, Great Job!

Carolyn: Your speech was very interesting, you have a great topic! The stats in the beginning caught my attention and were interesting. You seemed poised and had a really good pace. You could work on using less fillers for next time, and on a little more eye contact. Overall, I enjoyed your speech a lot!

Joe DeArmitt: Great job on your speech you were very confident, slow and clear, easy to understand. One thing I noticed was you seemed to look at the teacher a lot and there wasn't a lot of scanning. Another good thing about your speech was you didn't use any fillers and you had good transitions.

Sarah Dunning: Great job Laura! I know you were nervous (because you told me) but I couldn't tell while you were up there, so well done! You had great attention grabbers with really astonishing facts to draw us in. Good credibility, great word choice and vocab-- it sounded very professional. Good eye contact, you may want to project a bit more, although I was in the front.. I feel as though you may have been a bit soft spoken for those in the back. YOu elaborated on each point very well and I think over all your voice was really steady and you seemed confident and comfortable so great job!!

Liz Peters: You did very well presenting your speech. Like Sarah said, I know you were nervous but it did not come off that way at all. You did a good job stating your sources and also incorporated good facts to show your creditability. Work on your eye contact and relying less on your note cards for you next speech.

Scot Brown: You started off quite strong, but faltered a bit after the first minute, using fillers and um a lot.