Assignment:
Read below and respond it please based on your thoughts
What is the argument being addressed?
The argument is that large companies, like Proctor & Gamble, project images of environmental consciousness. However, their business practices are questionable and often violate environmental protection efforts.
What is the author's thesis?
"Procter & Gamble is far from a green company."
What evidence is being used to support the argument?
There are many examples throughout. The author discusses the difficulty in getting the P&G to fulfill the donation promise. She also discusses how they use animal testing during product development. Potts also mentions the extent of lobbying against environmental regulations.
Is the opposing view addressed in the argument, and what is it? How is it refuted?
Yes it is. Potts addresses that the company does actually donate funds to wildlife charities and facilitates donations from their consumers. They also donate their products to bird rescue centers. The donations are refuted by the fact that P&G donate more towards lobbying than they do towards charity. She refutes the soap donation opposing argument by drawing attention to the fact that Dawn isn't a green product and is both petroleum-based and has a plastic bottle.
What, if any, appeals (emotional, logical, or ethical) are used in the argument?
I believe the author hit on all three appeals. Emotional with the animal testing topic, logical with the hypocrisy of lobbying, and ethical in leading the consumers to believe they are donating when there is further action required.