The newspaper article is very plain and boring, defiantly aimed at the mature audience. It contains an image of the author, Poly Toynbee, in black and white and the text is Times New Roman size 10. It is set out into 4 columns and starts with a large capital letter. It also contains a extract from the text ‘If a mouse cant die to save a child, they’ve won their argument.’ This catches the reader’s eye and attracts more attention to the article if they were just glancing at it. I find this rather effective and it would catch my eye if I glanced at the article and draw my attention towards reading it.
On the Animal Rights Leaflet there is a main image of a dog on the front, which I think appears to be crying. This looks the part and the dog really does look sad. This attracts attention as if the dog was crying for help. The use of colour is used well as the picture of the dog is a golden brown shade, which is very attractive I would say. People will instantly want to read this leaflet because of the expression on the dog’s face. On the back of the leaflet there is picture of a mouse with some sort of growth coming off its side, I suspect that this is a tumour of some sorts. Personally I don’t find this disturbing but a vast majority of the public will do and will never want that to happen again so they will want to pledge money to help stop animal experimentation. There is another picture of a monkey of some sorts and it appears to be very sad as if it has been tortured etc. I think the choice of pictures on this leaflet is rather good and will help put the point across to the reader.
The newspaper articles picture is very plain and boring. It is just a picture of Poly Toynbee in black and white, and I think that she looks rather stern. I think this picture is just there to let you know who actually wrote the article.
On the Animal Rights article the title clearly reads in bold black writing in Arial font ‘It’s a crying shame.’ This is rather effective I think because there is a picture of a canines face on the page and it appears to be very sad and crying, thus getting the point across to the reader. However Poly Toynbee’s piece entitled “Sorry, but I think dying people are more important than dumb animals”. This is a good title, as the reader will see it and they would largely agree on that point. Also the article would be in a broad page newspaper so that intellectual people read the article and do think that human life is more important than animal’s.
Poly Toynbee’s argument is that she would rather have dumb animals dying than humans. I think that and intellectual person would say that she is arguing a very good point. Poly attitude towards animal experimentation and to animal rights activists is that she basically wants to show how humans are the most important race on the planet and that it doesn’t matter what gets killed as long as it is to save as human life. She thinks that animal rights activists are just a waste of space and that they aren’t going to get any action done for what they are protesting for.
The Animal Aid leaflet is all about trying to save animals, and the prevention of animal experimentation. They feel that killing animals is wrong for whatever cause. They also say that it is ‘immoral’, it is ‘bad science’ and that ‘Hurting animals in laboratories won’t improve human health.’ They want members of the public to feel the same that they do towards animal experimentation, and also want them to campaign against it as they think it is wrong.
Poly Toynbee’s article uses mainly very blunt and to the point language. She also uses real life facts and statistics: ‘only 5 per cent of medical research uses animals.’ And ‘Maybe because only 7 per cent of the population is vegetarian, so an out-and-out vegetarian war wouldn’t catch the public imagination.’ This proves points very well and gets it to the reader plainly and simply. As before she is trying to get the reader to approve of her opinions and to simply really care about human welfare.
Overall, I agree with Poly Toynbee’s argument. Personally, I would much rather survive than a canine or rat. Human life is one of the most important factors in this millennia’s time frame and as the world is ultimately going to be destroyed we should inhabit it as long as humanly possible, no matter what the cost…
