Annotation_8_Fresh

Annotation #8 Word count: 777


 * 1. Title, director and release year?**
 * Title: “**Fresh”
 * Director:** Ana Sofia Joanes
 * Release Year:** 2009

The main argument of the film is that natural farming is better than industrial farming. There are many economic benefits to having natural farming through approximating natural wild life despite lack of supporting policies.
 * 2. What is the central argument or narrative of the film?**

There is certainly a large emotional appeal since many horrors of industrial farming are shown and discussed. They talk about how it is common to feed cows to cows and chicken to chicken in conventional farming. Argument is mainly sustained through a series of interviews with organic farmers that talk about what they do and how it is better than the industrial farming.
 * 3. How is the argument or narrative made and sustained? How much scientific information is provided, for example? Does the film have emotional appeal?**

Economically, it was said that organic farming scales up faster. It is better economically because, for example, it is 4$ vs 0.79$ for a dozen of eggs grown naturally vs conventionally. Health wise, natural eggs and other organic products have a higher nutritional value (Omega and vitamin A). Behavioral problem can be drawn out of the same horrifying industrial practices. It is just inhumane to treat animals like that. In industrial farming, it also takes a lot of antibiotics to keep animals alive since they are packed in tiny spaces right next to each other where bacteria spreads a lot faster. Politically, industrial farmers are subsidized by the government which makes it hard for them to change ongoing practices.
 * 4. What sustainability problems does the film draw out?Political? Legal? Economic? Technological? Media and Informational?****Organizational? Educational? Behavioral? Cultural? Ecological?**

It was great to see farmers who switched from industrial to natural farming. It was quite obvious that they enjoyed it more. They certainly appeared to be very happy and did not regret the decision they made a single bit. Most of them just simply approximated natural wild life because they thought that nature knows better. Overall, they all succeeded not only economically but also behaviorally. If you are proud to show your work to others that makes you a proud man. I don’t think industrial farmers would invite their friends or local restaurant owners to their farms.
 * 5. What parts of the film did you find most persuasive and compelling? Why?**

It seemed a bit one sided since no industrial farmers or just people who supported industrial farming were shown. Now granted, it would be extremely hard to find such a person since it is obvious that organic farming looks a lot better and has a strong social support but perhaps at least a few pros in favor of industrial farming would spice it up a bit. Even if those pros are purely materialistic such as money they should have been still presented.
 * 6. What parts of the film were you not compelled or convinced by? Why?**

I think it clearly addresses all consumers. Indirectly, it asks people to support local organic farmers so that they can survive the competition from such stores like Walmart. Also, it encourages to start your own gardening practices because it is not so hard and there is a great health benefit to it.
 * 7. What audiences does the film best address? Why?**

Other end of the argument was clearly missing in this film. Also, to enhance its environmental educational value some statistical data from experts could be presented.
 * 8. What could have been added to this film to enhance its environmental educational value?**

It suggests that farmers should try to switch to natural farming. Industrial farming is based on monocultures. Nature doesn’t have monocultures and that is one of the big issues with current industrial practices. This is why so many pesticides and hormones are used for reducing the risk of animal death. By switching to natural farming farmers can cut bills on antibiotics and make more in the end. For consumers, the main course of action is to stay informed and support local farmers.
 * 9. What kinds of action and points of intervention are suggested by the film? If the film itself does not suggest corrective action, describe actions that you can imagine being effective.**

I looked at certain free-range and organic meats myths and how companies get around regulations just to put “organic” label on their products. [] I also found that there are actually government sponsored grants for small farmers that want to grow organic food. []
 * 10. What additional information has this film compelled you to seek out? (Provide at least two supporting references.)**