SeaWorld of Hurt
The growing argument over if killer whales should or should not be kept in captivity is becoming more widespread and well-known, simply because of attractions like SeaWorld and improving technology that extend further opportunities for research. The first article Why Killer Whales Shouldn’t Be Kept in Captivity by the SOS Dolphins organization, written August 7th, 2017, portrays an argument over the negative effects of using Orcas on display in captivity. The second article Research Helps Wild Whales from the SeaWorld Cares entertainment organization, written in March 2017, explains the reasoning their efforts in captivating these Orcas and furthering research. While the both articles cover the same topic, Why Killer Whales …show more content…
SeaWorld is trying to convey their purpose for their extensive research and how their care is beneficial to killer whales and guests that attend SeaWorld, but the first article immediately gives in depth factual evidence of how negative captivity naturally is. In the first paragraph of the first article, it is stated that “…killer whale research we conduct has direct benefit to science”, but people who are looking for the care of these animals are not given enough examples, specifically, on how SeaWorld can provide a steady environment (Research Helps). On the other hand, SOS Dolphin organization opens up with factual evidence that broadens the readers thinking. When deciding on what is better for killer whales vs what is not, the first articles allows natural thought process to occur when reading. The audience is looking for an answer. SOS Dolphins provides that when stating that” Killer Whales are energetic and dynamic animals. Gifted with a high emotional intelligence, their life is based on family and social relations…” (Why Killer Whales Shouldn’t). They use a technique that pulls on their hearts of when writing to pursued all ages of audience; which is much more …show more content…
For example, in the paragraph about mortality, it is said that “[t]he levels of mortality of these animals in captivity are 2.5 times higher than in nature…” then that is followed up with explanations that is based on information about killer whales on what is needed for their health to be positively impacted (Why Killer Whales Shouldn’t). While in the second article, SeaWorld bases their claims mostly on hope for furthering research. There isn’t a “now” factor that gives inspiration like the first article, because SeaWorld apparently cares more about scientist and conservationist rather than the actual future well-being of killer whales. When in the paragraph about “Understanding the Life History of Killer Whales” SeaWorld explains that “Those insights are critical to understanding the reproduction and development of whales in the wild, where these patterns would be virtually impossible to study” then directly address how it positively impacts scientist and conservatives. The audience would question the “why” putting killer whales at risk for further endangerment. Although, when reading the first article, everything is directed towards the well-being of these animals, rather than simply furthering research. SOS Dolphin also gives history that shuts down most of SeaWorld’s ideas. The history of attacks like “…at
The growing argument over if killer whales should or should not be kept in captivity is becoming more widespread and well-known, simply because of attractions like SeaWorld and improving technology that extend further opportunities for research. The first article Why Killer Whales Shouldn’t Be Kept in Captivity by the SOS Dolphins organization, written August 7th, 2017, portrays an argument over the negative effects of using Orcas on display in captivity. The second article Research Helps Wild Whales from the SeaWorld Cares entertainment organization, written in March 2017, explains the reasoning their efforts in captivating these Orcas and furthering research. While the both articles cover the same topic, Why Killer Whales …show more content…
SeaWorld is trying to convey their purpose for their extensive research and how their care is beneficial to killer whales and guests that attend SeaWorld, but the first article immediately gives in depth factual evidence of how negative captivity naturally is. In the first paragraph of the first article, it is stated that “…killer whale research we conduct has direct benefit to science”, but people who are looking for the care of these animals are not given enough examples, specifically, on how SeaWorld can provide a steady environment (Research Helps). On the other hand, SOS Dolphin organization opens up with factual evidence that broadens the readers thinking. When deciding on what is better for killer whales vs what is not, the first articles allows natural thought process to occur when reading. The audience is looking for an answer. SOS Dolphins provides that when stating that” Killer Whales are energetic and dynamic animals. Gifted with a high emotional intelligence, their life is based on family and social relations…” (Why Killer Whales Shouldn’t). They use a technique that pulls on their hearts of when writing to pursued all ages of audience; which is much more …show more content…
For example, in the paragraph about mortality, it is said that “[t]he levels of mortality of these animals in captivity are 2.5 times higher than in nature…” then that is followed up with explanations that is based on information about killer whales on what is needed for their health to be positively impacted (Why Killer Whales Shouldn’t). While in the second article, SeaWorld bases their claims mostly on hope for furthering research. There isn’t a “now” factor that gives inspiration like the first article, because SeaWorld apparently cares more about scientist and conservationist rather than the actual future well-being of killer whales. When in the paragraph about “Understanding the Life History of Killer Whales” SeaWorld explains that “Those insights are critical to understanding the reproduction and development of whales in the wild, where these patterns would be virtually impossible to study” then directly address how it positively impacts scientist and conservatives. The audience would question the “why” putting killer whales at risk for further endangerment. Although, when reading the first article, everything is directed towards the well-being of these animals, rather than simply furthering research. SOS Dolphin also gives history that shuts down most of SeaWorld’s ideas. The history of attacks like “…at