The American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (ASPCA) commercial, featuring Sarah McLachlan, has become infamous for either making viewers weep uncontrollably or rush to change the channel. Even Sarah McLachlan admitted, in an interview with Huff Post, she too changes the channel when the commercial comes on because, “It is just so depressing” (Becker). With this reputation it is hard to believe the advertisement successfully produced $30 million in donations to the ASPCA (Becker). It is as if the producers of the commercial found a way to shock the audience with pathetic images of animals in need, and then capitalized on that emotion by providing the audience with an uncomplicated way to help. A recent commercial dealing with Hurricane Harvey pet relief, released by the Humane Society of the United States, follows a similar yet more subdued model. Both commercials deploy the rhetorical proofs of pathos, logos, and ethos to persuade the audience it is their civic duty to help animals in need through donations; however, lacking a kairotic event such as a hurricane, the ASPCA was left to create a sense of urgency in their argument, leading to a heavier reliance on rhetorical devices.

The ASPCA advertisement boldly deploys pathos to elicit sympathy from its viewers, which makes the audience want to help the cause. The commercial begins by playing many images of sad, desperate, and neglected animals while Sarah McLachlan’s song, “Angel”, plays in the background. These images are very skillfully chosen to not only portray neglected animals, but more specifically, be images of animals looking into the camera. This forces the viewer to literally face the tragedies of these animals and instantly creates an urge to help. McLachlan’s song, which plays throughout the commercial is also instrumental in affirming this sympathy. The song is based on the commonplace of angels being

guardians, with lyrics such as “In the arms of an angel, fly away from here” illustrating this (Werbehr). This song, and the commonplace imbedded within it, parallel the aim of the commercial, which is to convince the audience to assist in the rescue effort of neglected animals. This is evident when McLachlan appears on camera and connects back to the song by asking, “Will you be an angel for a helpless animal?” (Werbehr). This challenges the audience to embody the commonplace and act on their desire to help. Both the pathetic images and song lyrics, leave the audience in a position for persuasion.

With pathos acting as a foundation for the advertisement, subtler logical arguments are made before the audience is explicitly asked for donations. Amongst the images in the first half of the commercial, text appears outlining a very logical progression of thought. The first line says, “Every day in America thousands of animals suffer cruelty and neglect” (Werbehr). Including this fact, gives credibility to the images and proves to the viewer that animal cruelty is a major problem. Next this sentence appears, “Thousands were rescued last year, but for thousands of others, help came too late” (Werbehr). By using the same number as the first phrase, the audience can easily piece the thoughts together into a progression. Providing an end to this line of thought and presenting a pathway for the audience to act on their urge to help, McLachlan explains, that for only 60 cents a day, the audience could help to change these statistics. The same amount of money could have been described as 4 dollars a week, 18 dollars a month, or 216 dollars a year, but by choosing 60 cents a day, the donation seems achievable. Most people would not question spending 60 extra cents in a day because it seems like a minuscule amount of money, whereas, $216 a year, or even $18 a month, seems like an inconvenience. Through these examples, the advertisement builds the logical argument that: one, there are animals in need and two, the viewer can easily help. However, this argument would not have been as effective if pathos had not been used to create the urge to help in the first place.

The use of ethos in the advertisement works to dissuade any final apprehensions the viewer may have about donating by gaining the audience’s trust. As previously stated, the song “Angel”, epitomizes the theme of the advertisement. This connection was a probable reason McLachlan was chosen for the advertisement campaign, along with her reputation of emotion provoking and wistful songs. By showing her song parallels the cause, McLachlan gains credibility on the issue and the audience perceives her as trustworthy. The ASPCA also must prove its credibility as an organization. They do so by showing images of their officers rescuing animals. When the audience can trust that the organization has the capability to follow through on what they are promising, they are more willing to donate. While the pathetic and logical arguments made are successful in persuading the audience of the importance of donating, the deployment of ethos gives the audience the confidence to act.

The Humane Society’s “Animals Saved from Hurricane Harvey” video follows similar, yet more superficial, use of rhetorical proofs to garner donations for their efforts. The advertisement shows footage of the destruction of the hurricane to gain the audience’s sympathy. With only a few images of animals being used throughout the video, it is evident the producers thought showing images of flooding and devastation would be more pathetically appealing. This is contrasting to the ASPCA commercial, which primarily relies on images of animals to draw emotion from the viewers. Similarly to the ASPCA, the Humane Society uses logos, through text, to outline a logical progression. They say, “We are currently rescuing animals from flooded homes and bringing them to safety” with the words “flooded homes” and “safety” bolded to add emphasis (The Humane Society of the United States). Next the sentence, “With your support, [we] will continue to help those affected by destructive storms,” appears and builds off the first (The Humane Society of the United States). It is now understood by the audience that the Humane Society is trying to help, but needs support. As a way to provide that support, the audience is asked to give an “emergency donation”. In contrast to the ASPCA, the Humane Society does not disguise the donation amount in daily increments, nor do they even suggest an amount. This

extra layer of persuasion is not needed to gain doantions. Like the ASPCA, the Humane Society also proves its credibility as an organization by showing images of how they are already helping in the disaster, but they do not utilize celebrity endorsement as a form of ethos. While all of the rhetorical proofs are evident in the advertisement, their development is less exhaustive than in the ASPCA advertisement.

The main reason for this discrepancy is the difference in the rhetorical situation of each advertisement. The Humane Society commercial is reacting to a very well-known natural disaster, Hurricane Harvey. This creates a kairotic moment for the commercial to exist. The persuasive rhetorical situation only needs minor support from rhetorical proofs to successfully convince the audience to donate. However, the ASPCA’s argument lacks this kind of flashpoint to give it a greater context and must overcome this deficit by utilizing rhetorical proofs. This is obvious in the first half of the commercial. By showing the pathetic images, describing applicable commonplaces, providing facts as a basis of their logical argument, and proving their credibility, the ASPCA successfully persuades the audience of the need to donate. Still, this could all be ignored if the audience did not recognize the direness of the situation. This urgency is conveyed by inserting time sensitive phrases, such as, “For thousands help came too late” and “Right now there is an animal that needs you” (Werbehr). These phrases create kairos for the ASPCA’s argument, providing what was lacking in the rhetorical situation.

Although both advertisements make use of pathos, logos, and ethos, the ASPCA commercial relies on them more heavily because it lacks the kairos evident in the Humane Society advertisement. The ASPCA’s use of pathos makes the viewer desire to help neglected animals, their utilization of logos presents a way to channel this desire into donations, and ethos creates trust with the audience making them more likely to donate. The Humane Society does not need to create such a sophisticated strategy because most of the audience is aware of the tragedies caused by the hurricane; therefore, they do not

need as much convincing before they are ready to help. These commercials illustrate how the proper kairotic moment can allow for trade-offs that create simpler, yet equally effective arguments.

Works Cited
Becker, Caitlyn, and Sarah McLachlan. “Sarah McLachlan: ‘I Can’t Even Watch’ My ASPCA Commercials.”

YouTube, HuffPost Live, 9 May 2014, www.youtube.com/watch?v=0G5fhstf44Y. Accessed 27

Sept. 2017.
The Humane Society of the United States. Animals Saved from Hurricane Harvey. The Humane Society

of the United States, The Humane Society of the United States, videos.humanesociety.org/detail/videos/featured-videos/video/5567544567001/animals-saved- from-hurricane-harvey?autoStart=true.

Werbehr. “ASPCA.” YouTube, YouTube, 3 July 2007, www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iu_JqNdp2As.