NYC Soda B Rhetorical Analysis
Are sugary the cause of an increase in the rate of obesity in America. The debate over NYC proposal to ban sugary drinks raises awareness to New Yorkers, People who are obese, Soda Consumers, and Voters that the obesity rates have risen and need to drop. Casey Neistat’s video debating the NYC Soda Ban argues informatively that logically just banning sodas won’t change the obesity rate and since he is a New Yorker he knows the loopholes and flaws of the system to inform that the soda ban won’t change anything because people can get around it.
Neistat uses an informative tone to raise awareness that with these larger drinks we don’t take into account that we are actually drinking more than we normally would if we had a smaller portion. A 32oz drink, a large McDonald's cup, is the equivalent of drinking 4 small 8oz sodas, also 104g of sugar, which we don’t think about but also wouldn’t drink if we did.(1:34) In the first two minutes of the video Neistat begins by strengthening the argument of the …show more content…
The mayor is quoted in saying that the law is to fight the obesity epidemic, right after this new report Neistat enters a humorous style of music (0:21). Neistat's opinion to the audience is very obvious in these first 30 seconds because of his selection in mocking the mayor, he knows that soda alone cannot change and never could change the epidemic of obesity not just in NYC but anywhere. The ban was eventually declined. Only food establishments regulated by the city will be affected by this ban, such as restaurants and movie theaters (2:10). Alternatives are a major reason why the bill's purpose will not stand strong since we know that food trucks, store chains, and etc.. will not be affected. Also Neistat knows that lessening the amount of soda people drink cannot control change the fact that fatty foods and other bad and unhealthy foods are consumed on a daily
Neistat uses an informative tone to raise awareness that with these larger drinks we don’t take into account that we are actually drinking more than we normally would if we had a smaller portion. A 32oz drink, a large McDonald's cup, is the equivalent of drinking 4 small 8oz sodas, also 104g of sugar, which we don’t think about but also wouldn’t drink if we did.(1:34) In the first two minutes of the video Neistat begins by strengthening the argument of the …show more content…
The mayor is quoted in saying that the law is to fight the obesity epidemic, right after this new report Neistat enters a humorous style of music (0:21). Neistat's opinion to the audience is very obvious in these first 30 seconds because of his selection in mocking the mayor, he knows that soda alone cannot change and never could change the epidemic of obesity not just in NYC but anywhere. The ban was eventually declined. Only food establishments regulated by the city will be affected by this ban, such as restaurants and movie theaters (2:10). Alternatives are a major reason why the bill's purpose will not stand strong since we know that food trucks, store chains, and etc.. will not be affected. Also Neistat knows that lessening the amount of soda people drink cannot control change the fact that fatty foods and other bad and unhealthy foods are consumed on a daily