How does appearance affect protest?

After watching the Yes Men, I really liked the way that the Yes Men presented themselves. Mike and Andy provided humor and dramatics to prove their point that the World Trade Organization was not helping other developing countries to improve. I liked how they would try to pretend they were representatives of the WTO and speak about them and how their audience would never react to the outrageous comments they made. I think they were not very effective, though, because many of their audiences did not react to their claims that the WTO was actually trying to make money by taking advantages out of poor countries. They even made outrageous costumes that were really silly to prove their points that the WTO was a silly organization. The Yes Men would wear business suits and would lie that they were representatives of WTO while making outrageous comments about WTO at the same time. I thought this was really funny, but I probably would not support them because I think lying does not help with their ethos. Who would be willing to believe the Yes Men and support them if they use lies as a technique to advocate their opinions?

I think appearance is very important for a protest group to advocate their opinions against someting. If a protest group seemed very professional and looked like they know what they are talking about, people would most likely take the protest group seriously and be willing to support them. However, if a protest group uses a silly and laughable appearance, most people would not take the protest group seriously and would most likely laugh off the protest group’s opinions.

Staging protests in different mediums

Both the PETA and the Guerilla Girls used the internet to voice their opinions and talk about what their organizations are all about. PETA used a lot of billboards, and the Guerilla Girls used a lot of posters. In my opinion, all of these mediums used can be seen by many people. However, I think using billboards or posters are more effective because people are able to see it more easily if it’s “eye-catching.” For instance, everyone uses the internet, but that doesn’t mean that posting things on the internet will get you attention. There are so many things on the internet that many of the things posted there are unseen or missed by others. Therefore, I think using posters or billboards is the most effective medium to use when trying to voice an opinion or promote an organization.

After reading about the PETA, I understand what they are trying to do and say. However, I don’t necessarily agree with everything they say and do. They believe that all animals have rights and that they should not be inflicted unnecessary pain. I agree with this. However, I also believe that sometimes pain is necessary to progress. Humans, for instance, have undergone much suffering and pain to be where we are today. We’ve been through wars, starvation, storms, etc. to be what we are now. All of this included pain and suffering, but without pain or sacrifice, there can be no progress. It may seem heartless and unmoral to say such a thing, but in reality, from what I’ve seen in this world so far, this is true. I don’t like it, and I don’t like thinking about it. However, it doesn’t make it any less true. I believe in the cause of the PETA, but I think they are fighting a losing battle. It is in our nature to use animals for many purposes, whether as food or as clothing. Just as animals use other animals for food, humans will continue to use animals for food or other purposes. It’s one fact of life that cannot be changed, whether or not people like it.

I really liked the Guerilla Girls after reading about them. They are funny, and I love the way they voice their opinions. They are also mysterious and unique compared to other organizations. I believe in feminism (of course, that’s probably because I’m an American female), and I like humor. Therefore, I really liked the way they executed their opinions through humor. Not only did they catch peoples’ attention by doing so, people will most likely be drawn to them because of the funny way they promote their organization. Funny things have always attracted a lot of people, and I think they are correct in using this method to attract others in listening to their opinions. If I started an organization, I would probably use the same methods to get peoples’ attention and get people to listen to my opinions.

Critical Mass: A Protest without a Leader

After watching We Are Traffic, it seemed that Critical Mass was just a group of people that joined together on bicycles to go for a ride. I don’t think it was really a protest movement because, from my experience and knowledge, protest movements are usually organized and have a specific leader and purpose. Critical Mass was not organized and had no leadership, so it didn’t really seem like a protest with the way it was designed. It seemed it was just like a bunch of people having fun riding bicycles at random times instead of driving their cars. Furthermore, there didn’t seem any centralized purpose to it. Everyone joined for different reasons, whether it was to save the environment or have fun. If I had seen something like the Critical Mass, I probably would have cheered them on, except when I’m running late to a class or something. Then, I’d probably be annoyed that they were being selfish and blocking other peoples’ traffic, but then again, that’s probably a normal reaction that everyone would have.

The one thing that stood out to me after watching the movie was when the police started getting involved. I have to admit that I was as annoyed by that as much the people in Critical Mass. I don’t think they were doing anything illegal that needed the escort of the police. I don’t like that the police and the mayor tried to interfere with the peoples’ freedom. There is nothing wrong with riding a bicycle with other people, and arresting people for riding the way they want to is, to me, a way of imposing the freedom of the people. Furthermore, I think the involvement of the police kind of made the activity not as much fun and carefree as before, and you could feel that the people in the Critical Mass thought the police was trying to undermine what they were doing. In my opinion, Critical Mass was just the name for the activity they were doing, not a protest movement, so the police and the mayor should never have gotten involved. I understand that they were doing it for the public safety, but I don’t think that is a good enough excuse to interfere with the freedom of others.

Ethos as a means of persuasion

After finding out about all these protests, I would say that the ethos of each was very believable. All protests gave many facts and background information about the people protesting against something, and in my opinion, facts are the most convincing because they are true. However, I think Martin Luther King when making a speech about the Freedom Marches was most persuasive because he is the only one that can prove that what he says is true. Furthermore, there were a lot of people that supported him. Cindy Sheehan makes many claims, yet I don’t think she can prove that all she says is true. For Malachi Richter, I believe that he should have taken a different way to protest against the Iraq war. One person can make a difference, but not through the expense of his family’s pain. Therefore, I think the ethos of the Freedom Marches is most persuasive because many supported it and the claims they made were very true.

The kind of ethos I find most appealing is situated ethos, where your reputation already exists and can be proven true. In my opinion, I think that a person’s claim must be able to be proven true in order to be believable. Otherwise, you’re just listening to someone else’s opinion and false claims. I have never really supported a protest group before, but if I could, I would support a group where I can see the proof that their claims are true and just.