Text: ‘Attacks on the food police’ is an editorial debate which was published in the New York Time on June 4th. It talks about the different views that the critics have over the food companies and argues as to why they are right. Reader/audience: I think this piece of writing was targeted at pretty much everyone who reads the New York Times. Everyone has a McDonalds or some type of fast food from time to time so the article could catch a lot of reader’s attention. However, I feel that it will catch people’s attentions who are food lovers and McDonald/fast food eaters themselves.
The writer would expect to write to neutral/undecided audience with the intentions of swaying their minds to believe his ideas. Author: The author writes and develops a well presented debate/argument. It was written by Michael Pollan who has recently been recruited to become a part of the ‘food police’ himself so his views can come across as more biased. Constraints: The author is constrained by the beliefs that there has to be a change in how the fast food companies are marketing and producing there food products. He believes that the ‘food police’ have to keep doing their job in order for a change to come about.
They feel very strongly that these companies need to make people aware of what is really going into their food, not just what they say is going into it. He is also constrained by how companies like McDonalds are spending 36 million dollars to market their food to us whereas companies like the National Cancer act are spending 1 million dollars to try and advertise to eat healthy fruit and veg. Exigence: Reports have begun showing up in media accounts of campaigns to reform school lunches. The ‘food police’ have been reported that they want to get rid of sodas and fast foods in schools. Also
