Cowspiracy

The film, Cowspiracy, is a documentary that was released in 2014 advocating against the
over consumption of meat, beef in particular, and the consequences of this gluttony:
maltreatment of resources such as land and water. At the beginning of the film, the narrator
introduces himself and how he developed his passion for improving the environment. He
explains the changes he made to counteract global warming: shortened showers, less
consumption of light and using his body as transportation. He was startled to find that all the
improvements that he and others have made would not make much impact on the environment.
After reading an UN article, he was stunned to find out that livestock, particularly cows, were the
greatest contribution to global warming; raising livestock contributed more to global warming
than all forms of transportation-caused pollution combined. He then proceeded to research and
present this problem in a cause, effect, and solution argument form with many facts and
interviews. He travels from environment agencies to government offices, questioning the
members of these organizations. No one was able to answer with a concrete answer until he
visited an ex-rancher. After working with livestock for some time, the former rancher revealed
the secrets that modern ranchers are trying to hide today, The narrator then explored different
solutions, such as backyard farming, grass fed ranchers, and the vegan lifestyle, concluding that
becoming vegan was the best option to counteract the destruction of the environment.
The credibility of this formed by the use of multiple facts, statistics, and interviews.
Narrating the film with a first person view helps to validate the ethos of the film and make it
personal. The narrator went an extra step to show that he was concerned with the problem by
explaining himself and showing the struggles he encountered to find a solution. The interviews
with said environmentalists intensified the issue. By showing that most of the departments that
are in charge for advocating against the misuse of the earth are blinded to the biggest
contribution causes the audience to question what these departments goals are. The continuous
battle between GreenPeace and the narrator seemed to validate that something was trying to be
kept a secret. The immediate defunding of the film after the narrator held a conversation with a
livestock spokesperson about the companys contributions to environmental groups also adds to
suspicion. The killing of the Brazilian based Nun combined with the previous realizations causes
the audience to question the intentions of both the government and ranch owners. The film has a
bias, as all arguments do. The filmmakers did not ignore the counterargument that meat is needed
in a humans diet, however, this counterargument was not addressed fully. The narrator stated
that humans were omnivores but they only need 2 ounces of meat/dairy per week contrasted to
the 10 ounces that Americans consume per day. Milk can be essential for growing toddlers, but
the nutrients of this milk are to strengthen calves, not adult humans. If a country like India or
China were to consume as much as an average American, there would not be a sustainable meat
source. With an interview with an engineer that creates meat-like protein plants, the narrator
offers a solution for those who still crave meat. Other aspects the film used to convince the
audience were tools such as music, rhetoric (metaphors and similes) for comparison, and

graphics. The music was an aid to create emotional levels that would otherwise would not be
apparent in the film. Music dramatized the serious facts, interviews, and comparisons by making
stimulating the audience and making them more alert. The flighty, happy music found in the end
was to reassure the audience that solutions were available and that anyone could contribute to
fixing the problem. The comparisons paired with graphics were able to give the audience a
concrete confirmation of the facts. For example, the football fields that represented how much
deforestation of the Amazon forest cows caused verses plant agriculture and the amount of CO 2
contribution to global warming versus methane contribution in a form of a bar graph helps to
show the reader the massive differences. 15 football fields is a lot space compared to only 5
football fields, but seeing this graphic helps to confirm this difference. Though this film used
many elements to convince the audience, it still had issues. Many of the statistics, such as it takes
660 gallons to make a quarter pounder burger, were not explained, making them seem
unrealistic. The filmmakers could have taken the time to explain how this statistic comes to be
and or stated the source from which the statistic came from. The progression of the film seemed
awkward at times, I got lost at how some segments connected to the issue at hand. The narrator
took time to talk about the fishing industry and the damaging effects of it, though I didnt
understand how it connected to the beef issue. It is true that livestock creates dead-zones with the
fertilizer runoff, but that did not seem to relate with how wild fish and sharks were being
endangered due to the methods of fishing. The interview placed at the conclusion of the film with
the meat substitute company did not seem to have much importance either. The man explained
how each of us are important; these compliments were not needed. The filmmakers seemed to
not know how to end the film, and included this interview as a fill-in. The viewing of gruesome
graphics, such as the duck beheading, seemed to counteract the solutions the narrator had
created. He could have only talked about the vegan solution instead of scaring the audience with
an impractical solution
Though this film had some minor issues, it still did its job and opened my eyes to a
problem that can be solved. The facts and interviews that were presented convinced me that this
issue is one that needs to be spread to others. Change starts by increasing awareness and if
everyone is aware, large groups of people can contribute rather than just one person. Everything
seems to be based on money, and this is negatively affecting the only compatible planet we have.
Its sad that people are denying this issue and the global warming issue, due to greed. The most
viable solution of becoming vegan will likely not be a change that I will make now, I have
neither the time nor money to prepare food and trying to convince my family to switch would be
impossible. I can however, drink water at lunch instead of milk, consume less beef and cheese,
and rely on proteins such as chicken. I will make an effort to continue this process of awareness
by recommending this to others.