In the article "Greenpeace Links Barbie Packaging to Indonesian Rainforest Loss," the author effectively informs the reader, probably an environmental activist, of the ongoing controversy between Greenpeace and Mattel regarding the deforestation of Indonesian rain forests due to the packaging of Barbie dolls. The author succeeds in his purpose to inform the audience by employing logos to show a logical appeal to the issue, ethos to enhance the authority of those involved in the controversy, and imagery to demonstrate the magnitude of the issue. However, at times, the author uses the fallacy slippery slope in order to fortify the claim that Mattel is a main contributor to the deforestation of the Indonesian rain forests. .
One of the strongest appeals the author uses throughout the article "Greenpeace Links Barbie Packaging to Indonesian Rainforest Loss" is the appeal to logic or logos. Through this device, the author can relate to the audience from a logical standpoint backed up with evidence, such as empirical data and statistics. In the article, the author states that Greenpeace attempts to spread the news that Mattel is involved in the destruction of Indonesian rain forests. Because the author supports Greenpeace, he provides evidence that Greenpeace is successful in its campaign because "In 72 hours, more than 700,000 people viewed an online spoof video featuring the moment Ken discovers that Barbie is involved in rainforest destruction." This shows that because so many people are supporting the cause of stopping Mattel from destroying Indonesian rainforests, by logic, the audience should support Greenpeace, and not Mattel. The same type of logic is used to persuade the audience to reinforce Greenpeace's noble cause when the author goes on to let the audience know that at least 200,000 people care about the diminishing Indonesian rainforests because they "swamped Mattel's offices with emails" disapproving the methods used for the packaging of their dolls.