The last point that is made on the leaflet is “ fox hunting is cruel”. This point is actually being ripped up by the cartoon figure, giving the impression that even an anti – foxhunter has had his mind changed. This is suggesting that once he has been presented with the ‘facts’ they are able to change his mind.
In conclusion this leaflet puts up a barrier to what is really happening. For example they only mention what actually happens to the fox on the last page. “Hunting’s unique advantage is that the fox is either killed outright or the fox gets away totally unscathed”. It concludes the leaflet by saying, “ In these terms, fox hunting is not cruel and from the fox’s point of view it is better that it should continue. One has to question what the best interests of the fox are? Even though this leaflet is presented in a fairly light - hearted way it puts its point forward strongly and argues convincingly that we should keep fox hunting with hounds.
This next leaflet called, “ Foxes and Foxhunting” was published by the League Against Cruel Sports, an organisation which would like to see cruel sports, such as fox hunting, banned.
The first thing the reader will notice about this leaflet is the title, which is, “Foxes and Foxhunting”. This shows they are not trying to prove anything but it shows that they are presenting the real facts about fox hunting with hounds. The other factor, which will influence the reader, is the use of real photographs instead of humorous cartoons, showing again they are serious and that they want to show the true reality of foxhunting with hounds. Like the Countryside Alliance’s leaflet, the League Against Cruel Sports starts their leaflet with the question, “ Is the fox a pest?”. They then go on to answer the question using statistics and expert opinions wherever possible. At the end of the column of writing there is a photograph of a fox being held by its tail by a terrier man looking triumphant. The caption, which reads, “ No escape for this fox” suggests that the chances of the fox getting away are highly unlikely.
The content of the first piece of writing is similar to that of the of the Countryside Alliance as it addresses the issue of the fox as a pest first and then they both go on to discuss the subject of foxes taking live stock, like chickens and lambs. Both leaflets present the same points but it is hard to distinguish which is correct, as in some cases opinion is presented as fact. In the first leaflet by the Countryside Alliance they comment that foxes are not able to control their own numbers. “ It cannot be shown that foxes control their own numbers”. In the leaflet produced by the League Against Cruel Sports, they say the complete opposite and argue that foxes can indeed do control their own numbers. They say that, “ only 2.5% of the fox population” is killed due to foxhunting with hounds and that foxes can survive an annual mortality rate of up to 70% and still recover. The League Against Cruel Sports then go on to say that, “ it is clear that foxhunts play no significant role in the control of fox populations”. This totally contradicts the point made by the Countryside Alliance.
The next photograph that is used is one of a fox and a cat together. The caption reads, “ fox meets cat in suburbia”. This implies that foxes and cats can and do life together in harmony and that foxes are not vicious killers.
The second side of the leaflet has the title, “ Foxhunting” with a photograph of a traditional English countryside scene just before a hunt with a huntsman with his horse and hounds. It is showing all the good points about foxhunting like the tradition and the beautiful scenery. The caption reads, “ the public face of foxhunting” this shows that what the public actually see of fox hunting is only the tradition and not the gruesome kill itself. The other photograph on the page shows the true cruelty and the inhumane way in which the fox is literally torn apart. These still images used in the leaflet are very effective as they say more than words.
Overall this leaflet, published by the League Against Cruel Sports, uses a range of very affective methods to try and make the reader see the true facts about foxhunting. They try and uncover the myths about the so-called ‘sport’. The very fact that the word ‘sport’ is placed in inverted commas shows the way they feel about foxhunting and they try to put the message across that foxhunting with hounds is barbaric and should not be allowed to continue.
The third piece of media I am going to analyse is a video produced by the RSPCA. They are probably the best known and most respected organisation for the welfare of animals. They have produced this video to try to convince the British public that foxhunting with hounds should be stopped. In this video the RSPCA, the League Against Cruel Sports and the IFAW (International Fund for Animal Welfare) are working together on a campaign called deadline 2000, which is a campaign for the protection of hunted animals.
I believe that videos are a more effective method of showing people the message you are trying to put forward. With a leaflet you are left to imagine what is actually happening, whereas with a video there is no need to imagine, as everything is in front of you. Also with videos there are many ways in which you can influence the viewer. For example you can include music, special effects and vary the way information is presented. As more and more people watch visual images rather than read leaflets, it is a very effective method of presenting a point.
The video itself uses many of these techniques to get their message across. The first scene in the video is of the traditional English Countryside. We are shown huntsmen with their horses and hounds getting prepared for a hunt. This is shown with very peaceful and tranquil music playing in the background. The narrator then says, “ Picture a traditional hunting scene… Now look again”. After that the image suddenly changes to horrific black and white images of a fox being chased by a pack of hounds. The camera angles change frequently and the music is fast and powerful. Some of the images they use are very graphic. All of the effects used leave a lasting image with the viewer, showing us what really happens when a fox is hunted. This contrast showing the two views of foxhunting emphasises the fact that many people do not actually know what happens to the fox in a hunt.
After this dramatic opening sequence the title,” A view to a kill “ appears. This title suggests that the video will give the viewer an inside view of foxhunting with hounds. From this, background information on foxhunting is presented with many people’s opinions being shown. Lots of different people feel strongly against foxhunting including MP’s from different parties, farmers, professors, the general public and celebrities. With this wide variety of people they are trying to show that most people are opposed to foxhunting and that it isn't just a view individuals. In between the interviews we are shown images of cute fox cubs and rabbits. By using images of innocent looking foxes and rabbits they are trying to make the viewer feel sorry for the animal as well as showing them that this is how they should be treated.
Once again the film jumps from these images to black and white scenes of a fox being chased. This time they include footage of hare coursing and deer hunting. The last scene of this black and white section is of two greyhounds chasing a hare and when they catch it they pull it in different directions, like a tug of war. They use a still frame at the end of this scene, it is very disturbing as the viewer can see the rabbit being literally torn apart.
They comment that if foxhunting was to be banned then thousands of horses and dogs wouldn’t actually have to be killed. They say,” if foxhunting was to be banned then the owners of the horses wouldn’t just abandon their horse over night”. This shows that most people go hunting just for the thrill of the ride and only a few actually witness the kill.
As the video draws to an end they use more dramatic black and white footage. This time they show scenes of terrier men going out with lurchers and hounds simply to kill foxes. They end this section with a still image of a man holding a squealing fox in the air, smiling as if it is something to be proud of. This symbolises everything evil about foxhunting and shows exactly why it should be banned.
At the end of the video they re-play the opinions’ of the public, farmers and MP’s, each one echoing the last. The interviews are accompanied by the uplifting music, “Jerusalem”. This piece of music is very traditional to England and it symbolises all that foxhunting should ever be, a tradition and nothing else. They close the video with another image of a young fox cub running around looking innocent and sweet. The video itself leaves a lasting impact on the viewer, making them see that foxhunting with hounds has no place in the twenty-first century.
