Film Analysis: Behind The Food Industry's Door

Behind the Food Industry’s Door Walking down the grocery store aisle, it may seem like there is an endless amount of choices and varieties of food to buy, but in actuality, 80 percent of those products are controlled by only four companies in the United States. The food industry used to consist of organic produce and meats that were grown in the United States, that were then transferred to markets in the country. However, ever since the 1950s, when the fast food industry took off, a variety of new methods were introduced to make food cheap and fast, without much concern for quality. Bigger companies bought out smaller companies, and all of a sudden, the food industry was controlled by fewer than ten major corporations that make every decision

The film includes many instances where facts, logic, and scientific evidence are included to educate the viewer on how horrifying the food industry really is. Statistics on the food monopoly open the eyes of the viewer to how much power is in the hands of only a few people. One example of this is the soybean monopoly, owned by the company Monsanto, who is allowed under patent laws to sue farmers for saving and cleaning their seeds for reuse. Food, Inc. also includes information on the breakout of E. coli O157:H7, a deadly bacteria caused by the feeding of corn to cattle at CAFOs– Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations. The documentary explains that cattle are not adapted anatomically to digest corn, so the bacteria grows in their digestive tracts and is transferred to their manure, which then contaminates crops due to runoff. The horrifying facts included in the film are objective, so they impact everyone viewing the film, thus affecting the impact of Kenner’s argument. For this very reason, logos are the most effective form of persuasion in Food,

One of the reasons that social issue documentaries are so effective is their ability to show scenes and include music/sounds that are emotional to the viewer, and Food, Inc. is no exception. Mainly, the documentary includes personal anecdotes of people and families affected by the ills of the industry to relate to the viewer. Barbara Kowalcyk is a prime example of this. Kenner includes a testimony of her son’s tragic death due to the E. coli O157:H7 bacteria to emotionally move the viewer. He also includes the reaction of the USDA, which was to do nothing from preventing this event from occurring again. Obviously, this is a very effective element of the film, because almost nothing is more devastating than the loss of a child, and the viewer can recognize that, as shown by the typical reaction of sorrow and sympathy. Additionally, the film includes a personal anecdote from Vince Edwards, a farmer for the chicken company Tyson. He explains the inhumane treatment of his chickens that he must maintain, due to the control that the billion-dollar company has over him. He is also not allowed to show the inside of the chicken houses to the camera crew, a fact that is disgusting enough to persuade any viewer. Pathos, in this way, are used extremely well by Kenner to persuade audiences that the food industry deserves reform. Some may argue that emotional appeal is ineffective,