No matter what
people say, the human race is obsessed with food. We are obsessed with eating
it, dieting on it, cooking it, buying it, and working it off. Days that are not
revolved around when meals happen are few and far between. Since food is so
important to us, shouldn’t we be more concerned with what we are eating? What
we put into our bodies to function off of? This editorial in the Dallas News is focused around child nutrition.
The author uses imagery, diction, and details to prove his or her point that Congress
made an awful decision to not pass new USDA regulations for school lunches.
Throughout the
editorial, the author uses imagery to enhance their point. Instead of just
saying, “no one would eat pizza” they say, “no one would eat sauce-drenched
pizza” to put an overpowering image in the reader’s head. He or she used the
phrase “sugary soft drinks” to put an image in the reader’s head of an opaque
liquid engrossed with sugar particles. The author could have instead said “a
refreshing, cold soft drink” which would have made the reader crave a
refreshing soda instead of cringe at the idea. When describing things they are
trying to portray as disgusting, the author uses un-sexy descriptions. For
example, they use the phrase “a wedge of dough, cheese, and red sauce” to
describe pizza, putting it in a negative light.
At the same time, the author uses diction to further hook the reader.
For one, the author includes many phrases that one would use when talking about
weight and body image for other uses throughout the editorial. He or she says
things like, “the state is ahead of the curve” and “to shape up students eating
habits.” These puns bring the essay full circle and make the overall idea of
nutrition ever more prevalent by using negative connotations. When talking
about negative things, like childhood obesity and diabetes, the author uses
powerful descriptive words to make the awful consequences even more grotesque.
“Rampant obesity” and “fatten up little bodies” are just two examples of the
common occurrence. Sarcasm is included in this piece as well. The author makes
remarks such as “pizza sauce is a vegetable if the regulations call it one” to
show how ridiculous the current USDA regulations are.
The author
includes many important details to make their point. He or she uses some
astonishing facts that leave the reader in awe and most definitely on his side
of the argument. The author tells the audience “two tablespoons of tomato paste
qualify as a vegetable under current regulations.” A fact that I am sure the
majority of the public does not know but one that many would have a problem
with. They also use details such as talking about a Congress man/women at their
own home feeding their own children. Would a member of congress “in the
sanctity of his or her own home [point] to a piece of pizza and [refer to it as
vegetables]?” This scenario makes the reader disgusted at Congress’ decision; a
feeling they may not have gotten without that important detail.
This editorial about
Congress’ poor choice in not passing the new USDA regulations for nutrition in
elementary schools used diction, imagery, and detail to enhance the point. Once
one reads through it, they will most likely be convinced that a change needs to
be made to help the innocent children.
