In the article, Why Should Animal Testing be Banned,
by Shashank Nakate, the author seems very bias towards people who are in
agreement for animal testing. Nakate is
a feels strongly against animal testing and believes it should be stopped
immediately. She shows many different types of bias throughout
her editorial some I picked up on include: essentialism, availability cascade
and the ostrich effect.
Initially,
essentialism is demonstrated throughout the editorial. Shashank Nakate categorizes people according
to their essential nature. If you think
animal testing is good because otherwise humans would get hurt, she would say
you are wrong: “The results obtained from animal testing are
used to check whether a particular medicine or cosmetic product would have any
side-effects on human beings.” For
example, if someone was to use a medicine or cosmetic product that was tested
on an animal you would be categorized as a bad person. Though this may not be true, or you may not
even had known you are using a product that has been tested on an animal, you
will be placed in a group of oblivious selfish people. The author shows essentialism in this point
about products being animal tested.
Subsequently,
availability cascade pops up in this article a couple of times. Availability
cascade is a self-reinforcing process in which a collective belief gains more
and more plausibility through its increasing repetition in public discourse. Over the course of the editorial Shashank
repetitively says how awful animal testing is and gives reasons to back up her
beliefs: “The practice of animal testing
should be banned, considering that it is harmful from the ethical,
environmental as well as the economical point of view.” After saying that animal testing should be
banned many times the reader starts to believe the authors opinion. The author not only says that animal testing
should be banned directly but also in virtually every sentence there is a point
against this horrible act. Availability
cascade really helped the author to get her point across to the reader.
Additionally,
the ostrich effect was seen throughout the editorial. The ostrich effect means that you ignore an
obvious (negative) situation. Nakate is
very bias and eliminated the fact that people have other opinions on the
subject. She does not consider other’s
point of view. Other people may believe
that animal testing is a good thing, for it decreases the number of humans that
are hurt from unsafe products. Shashank
may use the ostrich effect and not even know it.
By and
large, in the article, Why Animal Testing Should be Banned, by Shashank
Nakate, the author shows bias to people in agreement with animal testing. Nakate is totally against animal testing and
wants it to disappear. Some major forms
of bias that I found in this editorial: essentialism, availability cascade and
the ostrich effect.
No comments:
Post a Comment