Article Analysis!  Compare and Contrast

 

      I will be comparing articles #1 and #2.  Both of the authors intentions of writing this article was to inform people on animal testing and tell the just how cruel and inhumane it can actually be.  These authors are trying to argue that animal testing should not be an approved method and it should not be legal.  Both of these articles main points are that animal testing is cruel and inhumane to animals who can't voice their own opinions.  Even though both authors have the same main arguement, ProCon.org uses more logos then Ian Murnaghan.  

      Ian Murnaghan doesn’t use as many rhetorical strategies but ProCon.org successfully uses all of the stratagies and persuades you into beleiving that animal testing is inhumane more thaet the other website.Neither ProCon.org or Ian Murnaghan contains text imagery.  The tone of these text are very straightforward and to the point.  They pretty much just let the facts speak for themselves.The better article is by far ProCon.org.  This article uses more explicit text and rhetorical appeals that the audience.