The Onion Makes Me Shed Tears... of LAUGHTER!

I hate to admit it, but it’s true. I, like many others, am not a very informed person. I don’t pay much attention to current events. Thankfully, there’s a wonderful website to keep me “informed” of current events: the Onion.

The Onion is the premier web site for news satire. Satire is such a powerful genre of writing, and can get the reader to understand the writer’s message better than straightforward, non-sarcastic writing. The Onion is meant for people who are at least of 18 years older, as evidenced by the disclaimer on the bottom of the web page. This suggests that the content in the material is for people of certain intellectual and maturity levels.


In general, the Onion is also aimed at readers who are well educated, intelligent, and follow current events well enough to understand the humor behind the text. The site is also aimed at people who, like myself, know nothing about politics and current events. By reading the humorous articles, one would become curious to know the actual event and story behind each article. Therefore, the Onion sends ignorant people, after they have read an article, to look up the news in the Onion’s perspective.


Reading through one of my favorite websites, I happened upon an article absolutely oozing with rhetorical tools. The article was titled, “Heroic PETA Commandos Kill 49, Save Rabbit.”

Maybe oozing wasn't the greatest word to use...

As the title suggests, overzealous PETA members kill an exorbitant amount of people to save one measly rabbit.

So, to be a bit more specific than before, this particular article is targeting people who already think that PETA members have gone off the deep end. Those who think this will thus be able to fully appreciate the irony used in this article. On the other hand, those who support PETA will not be satisfied with the negative and extreme portrayal of PETA.

Before more analysis is done on this article I think it is important to preface it with some background information. When it comes to animal rights, the first thing that comes to mind is most likely PETA, which is short for People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals; and right or wrong, PETA has connotations with an organization that is crazy, overzealous, and blinded by their goals. It takes only five minutes to find that PETA has a terrible reputation. You can click on this link, or this one, or this one, or maybe even this one. Those are but a few of the many sites that can be found online that are strongly opposed to PETA. These sites all generally call PETA and its members hypocrites and also include reasons why PETA has such negative connotations.

A quote from the second website listed effectively sums up the common perception of PETA: “Don't stick up for PETA. There are a bunch of terrorists for god's sake. They devalue human life. They think animals have more rights than humans.”

The article uses the previously mentioned negative connotations of PETA by sharing a news report that is so outrageously violent and appalling that it represents PETA’s connotations at its strongest. The Onion uses satire and the rhetorical tools that are encompassed by satire, as well as basic rhetorical tools, to convey their message to its audience. The use of satire is used to appeal to its readers and reinforces negative beliefs towards PETA. In addition, the distortion of the truth gets uninformed readers curious about PETA and the constant controversy surrounding the organization.

I suggest you read this article before you continue this blog post. Otherwise, I might spoil the article for you before you even get to experience it yourself. Trust me, you’ll want to read it first.

Now assuming, and hoping might I add, that you have read the article let’s see why this article was successful in bringing out laughter and insight.

Irony

Irony is a strong component of satire, and it is subsequently used effectively several times in this article. First, there is the irony in the article itself.

By simply reading the title, the main ironic point is understood: PETA killed 49 people to save one rabbit.

JUST ONE RABBIT!

One would argue (most correctly) that not even one human life, let alone 49, is worth the life of a single rabbit. Although PETA should value life on all fronts, PETA attempts to stick to its goals by preserving animal life at all costs! However it is ironic because humans, by definition, are also animals.

The news report also ends with an ironic twist. The animal that PETA saved with the cost of many human lives ends up getting viciously eaten by a fox the moment it is released into the wilderness! Not only is it ironic because the rabbit that PETA went out of their way to save ended up being killed, and was in fact safer in the hands of the so called barbarians than in the wilderness; but this ending was also very funny.

This ending also suggests a deeper meaning behind the article. Perhaps the author could be suggesting that maybe PETA is being counterproductive with some of their efforts. More likely, however, is this: No matter how hard we try to get something done, there are always going to be outside forces that can put a damper on your plans, whether they be altruistic or not. The author could also be suggesting that maybe PETA is being counterproductive with some of their efforts.


Tone AND Diction
Just like the Wonder Twins had to connect their rings in order to utilize their superpowers, the powers of tone and diction must be combined for these tools to work most effectively.

Form of... Great Rhetoric!

By using tone and diction, the reader can understand what the writer’s viewpoints are from a satirical standpoint. As proof, one only needs to see the diction when both the rabbit and humans are described. Whenever the rabbit is brought up, it is described very cutely. For example, it is described as being, “floppy-eared, having speckled gray longhair with an adorable pink nose.” How adorable!

Meanwhile the researchers are dubbed “filthy barbarians” and “hairless, human, animal-hating scum who so richly deserve to get their skulls smashed in with the back end of an automatic weapon.” The tone immediately shifts to a more serious and hateful one.

The article makes the contrast even more effective because the vulgar descriptions of the humans immediately follows the warmer description of the rabbit, or vise versa. In one instance, a PETA commando continues to comment on the cuteness of the precious bunny that was saved while she is, “walking past the charred and dismembered bodies of its captors.”


Imagery

The use of imagery in this article also reinforces the humor of the article. The false story goes as far as to describe the killings of the research facility workers in the most vivid and gory way possible.

As described by eyewitnesses, the victims were, “first immobilized by gunshot wounds to the knees before being shot execution-style in the back of the head.” The only thing that could possibly make it seem any worse was if the spatter of the blood and the explosion of the head were described.


Imagery is also used to convey the rabbit in the cutest way possible. For example, the writer reported that the rabbit, after being fed a carrot, had its, “adorable pink nose wiggle up and down, up and down as it chewed, making cute little chewy-faces.”

If the vivid descriptions weren’t enough, the article also came with two images to reinforce the absurdity of the article. So, let’s take a look at both of them!


















As you can see from the first image, there are commandos holding guns illustrating the raid of the research facility. Now, take a look at the commando on the right. He’s holding the rabbit! By the neck! That does not look comfortable for the rabbit in any way whatsoever.

Irony is also present in this image because although PETA is an advocate of the rights and proper treatment of animals, this rabbit that is allegedly being rescued is being carried around violently. Another thing worth noting is that the commandos even have the PETA logo on their sleeves. It’s funny to actually see PETA commandos in action, because the mere existence of them is ironic (they don’t actually exist!).

The second picture is just as interesting as the first! Also, this image is actually taken from another rabbit rescue three years prior to the main event in the article. What’s so powerful about this particular image is the strong contrast between the rabbit and the burning research facility. The small rabbit is unharmed and off at the bottom corner of the picture. Meanwhile, the burning building takes up nearly all of the space in the picture. There’s debris everywhere, and it will cost a lot of money to fix the damages done for the sake of one rabbit.

Whereas the first image reinforced the irony of the article, the second picture represents the extreme beliefs of PETA as exaggerated by the author.


Here are some other thoughts on the article:

• Another reason why this article is so effective in poking fun at PETA is because the story goes over the top with its already outlandish story. After the massacre at the research facility, the story gets ever more gruesome: “An attempt by the families of the Couture Cosmetics victims to bury their loved ones was met with equally savage resistance from PETA commandos, who strafed the mass funeral procession with machine-gun fire before spraying the cemetery with explosive flaming phosphorous gel, scattering the assembled mourners and killing seven.”One would expect the atrocity to end at the research facility attack, but the article surprises the reader yet again with another related shooting incident! At this point the reader is willing to accept any other outrageous actions by PETA.
• The article makes PETA members seem oblivious to the fact that the costs outweighed the benefits in this “rescue.” Either that or they value animal life much, much more than human life, which has been one of the key reasons many people are against PETA.
• Although news should be unbiased, based on the way the writer describes the rabbit, it is safe to say that the author is also sympathizing with the rabbit to a degree. The PETA commandos may have been very descriptive in their cute analysis of the rabbit, but the journalist also describes the rabbit cutely too. Basically, anytime the rabbit is mentioned it must be followed with words to reinforce the fact that it is precious and cute. The writer’s sympathy towards the rabbit suggests that the writer is not against ethical treatment of animals. Rather, the writer is against PETA and its practices.
• I loved the line, “PETA officials assured that no animals were harmed during the destruction of the complex.” This is a very clever play on the phrase, “No animals were harmed in the production of this movie.” The Onion is just so witty! This makes it seem like the whole procession of the massacre was routine, similar to the production of a movie.

The essence behind this particular article, as is the same for everything on The Onion, is satire. The article imitates a normal news report made by the Associated Press and reports a false story. One cannot help but laugh at the absurdity of the story. The use of irony and imagery of the terrible scene is used in such a beautiful way as to make the reader cry tears of laughter and agreement - if one thinks PETA is crazy, anyway.