Nicole Ulea

Professor Robert Speiser

Writing 2

10 June 2018

Analyzing Genre Through Ocean Pollution

Plastic pollution is an exigence that has inspired many people to research, write about, and

encourage others to understand the severity of the issue and take action. The ocean is home to

hundreds of thousands of different species, each relying on their oceanic ecosystem for food and

shelter. However, humans are threatening this unique environment. Since industrialization, more

and more plastic waste has ended up in our oceans. Researchers in Science estimated that about 4

million to 12 million metric tons of plastic washed offshore in 2010 alone(Angus). That is

enough to cover every foot of coastline on the planet.

Non-biodegradable items - like plastic - are responsible for the deaths of millions of

marine animals each year (Angus). Many die because they are unable to detangle themselves

after being caught in plastic items. This issue is important to address since it can lead to the

extinction of different species of marine animals. This is why many news outlets publish articles

on this topic. The authors of these articles direct their works towards a very specific audience -

people who tend to be concerned about environmental issues, often with a more liberal political

leaning. For example, the articles in the following paragraph were published in NBC News and

The Huffington Post, respectively. Both of these news outlets are known to be outstandingly

liberal. The authors write these articles so that they inform and encourage the audience to make a

positive change on this increasingly detrimental environmental issue.

 The news articles titled “Ghost gear clogging world’s oceans is having ‘catastrophic’

effect, report says” by Melanie Bencosme, Mariana Keller, and Erik Ortiz and “Ocean Plastic

Pollution Isn’t Just Immoral, It’s Illegal” by Oliver Tickell, both published in 2018, inform their

audience, while encouraging them to help reduce humanity’s contribution to ocean pollution.

Both articles use similar writing conventions. The assertion that ocean pollution is getting worse

is supported with facts and statistics (like the increasing percentage of sea animals that are

negatively affected by ocean pollution) which are used to establish credibility. Facts like these

help readers see the negative effects pollution has on wildlife and persuade them to take action to

stop the growing trend.

The tone of these articles suggests to the reader that they are credible, and that their

authors are not pushing a certain worldview. The articles are written in a neutral tone and do not

include the authors’ opinions. Although the article is completely neutral, the material also

subliminally encourages the audience to take action since it is written with a sense of urgency.

The vocabulary is academic and informed, but not watered down. Words such as “catastrophic”

and “viability” are used by Bencosme, Keller and Ortiz to establish an urgent tone. Catastrophic

is in quotation marks in the headline, a strategy that give a sense of urgency right away without

losing the neutral tone of the article. This makes the reader understand that he or she is reading a

trustworthy and well-researched article that is also sending a message.

These types of news articles generally contain easy to read, short paragraphs that often

include quotes from reputable organizations to further establish credibility. These magazine

articles tend to be two to three pages in length and remain factual and straightforward,

encouraging the busy reader to make it all the way to the end.
 Scientific journalists like the ones who wrote these magazine articles state what they

know as well as they possibly can, but they do not state their opinions as fact. The way in which

this specific information is communicated is extremely important because it is essential for

relaying the scientific information acquired by scientists in the field, to normal people like you

and me.

In the NBC article “Ghost Gear…”, the authors describe the deadly effects that

fishermen’s nets, lines, and traps have when they’re lost in the ocean. They include statistics like

“...up to 71 percent of ‘entanglement incidents’ involve encounters between an animal and

plastic rope or netting, which includes ghost gear. In 79 percent of cases, entanglement causes

harm or death...” (Bencosme, Keller, Ortiz). This gives the audience an inviolable fact,

establishing credibility. The tone in this article is serious and informative. Some may say it is

slightly biased against fishermen, since animals do not solely get tangled in fishermen’s supplies.

The writers purposefully direct this article towards an audience with some understanding of

water pollution already. The audience who is reading this article most likely came across it

because the topic of marine plastic pollution interests them. However, the term “ghost gear” is a

unique term, which helps to initially draw readers in because it establishes a different angle on a

topic that they already care about.

The article concerning “ghost gear” was probably published on NBC because of the

station’s more liberal audience. A different article titled “For Earth’s Day, Here’s How

Americans View Environmental Issues”, by Monica Anderson, states that Democrats and

Democratic leaners (72%) are about twice as likely as Republicans and Republican leaners

(35%) to cite protecting the environment as a top priority for Congress and the president

(Anderson).
 Similarly, the article “Ocean Plastic Pollution Isn’t Just Immoral, it’s Illegal” is targeted

towards Democrats who care about the environment. Tickell states “Ocean plastic campaigners

around the world can use the moral force of international law to pressure governments to fulfill

environmental commitments, enter into compliance, and take serious action to drastically reduce

plastic pollution to oceans.” (Tickell). The tone is a call to action - it’s much more persuasive

and politically inclined than “Ghost Gear…”. The article mentions how plastic that is abandoned

in our oceans is entangling and choking “endangered, charismatic species”. This description

appeals to the audience’s emotions, encouraging them to care more for these animals because

they are special.

Both articles utilize the modes of persuasion of ethos and pathos. Ethos is used by all of

the authors when they include facts to establish their credibility. Tickell establishes his

credibility by using statistics, like in this sentence (which would otherwise be a pure call to

action): “...change is what we desperately need ― to stop the flow of plastic into our seas,

currently estimated at some 8.8 millions tons a year; to save all the wondrous creatures and

precious ecosystems the plastic tide is propelling into extinction...” (Tickell). The statistic used

in this sentence gives the readers solid evidence of how much plastic is really in our oceans. It

helps make the argument more credible. In the same way, Bencosme, Keller, and Ortiz use ethos

by including similar statistical facts I mentioned earlier in this essay.

Pathos is used in both articles mainly to appeal to readers’ emotions. Let’s take the last

example from Tickell’s article: While the statistic gives credibility, the language adds a sense of

urgency. “A change is what we desperately need” directly calls on the reader’s emotions. And

“to save all these wondrous creatures” intends to make readers feel sorry for these marine
animals that have so much to offer. The use of the word “wondrous” to describe marine animals

is also used to establish an emotional effect because it portrays these animals in a positive light.

Bencosme, Keller, and Ortiz use Pathos in a similar way, although their article is a bit

less blatant. It states, "‘Ultimately this could mean our oceans simply stop providing for humans

in the many ways we now rely on them,’ the report said.” (Bencosme, Keller, Ortiz). This

undeniably appeals to readers’ emotions. However, it focuses more on the basic needs oceans

provide, using words like “rely” and “providing”. Despite the slightly different form, both

articles argue the same point: that oceans are critical to the lives of humans.

Articles such as the two I mentioned above are informative and target a certain audience

in order to encourage people to make a change on an issue. However, these kinds of articles have

some constraints. They generally need to be straightforward and not too lengthy, since the

audience is usually looking for quick information. They also have to be fairly neutral, and they

do not usually contain the author’s opinion. Readers are much less likely to think an article is

biased if it contains only facts and statistics. However, by analysing these articles, I noticed that

sometimes opinion seeps into even journalistic copy, particularly on an issue as loaded as this

one. The journalists who wrote these articles are all aware that they must communicate the

information they know to an audience with some previous understanding on the issue.

However, their final goal is to persuade their audience to understand and take action on the new

information that they provide in their articles. They do this by writing in a way that is efficient

and easy for the audience to understand. This genre is easy to spot, once you know what you are

looking for.
 Works Cited

Tickell, Oliver. “Ocean Plastic Pollution Isn't Just Immoral, It's Illegal.” The Huffington Post,

TheHuffingtonPost.com, 20 Feb. 2018,www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/ocean-plastic-pollution-

illegal_us_5a8c468be4b0e1acb11d8f6b.

Bencosme, Melanie, et al. “Ghost Gear Clogging World's Oceans Is Having 'Catastrophic' Effect, Report

Says.” NBCNews.com, NBCUniversal News Group, 10 Mar. 2018,

www.nbcnews.com/science/environment/ghost-gear-clogging-world-s-oceans-having-catastrophic-effect-

report-n855321.

ChenFeb, Angus. “Here's How Much Plastic Enters the Ocean Each Year.” Science | AAAS, 10 Dec.

2017, www.sciencemag.org/news/2015/02/here-s-how-much-plastic-enters-ocean-each-year.

Anderson, Monica. “For Earth Day, Here's How Americans View Environmental Issues.” Pew Research

Center, 20 Apr. 2017, www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/04/20/for-earth-day-heres-how-americans-

view-environmental-issues/.