The 'healthy' food movement in the United States has not lost momentum. In "The food movement is small? Not from where we sit, it isn't." by Anna Lappe (with assistance from Chellie Pingree), the central argument focuses on the changing eating trends among Americans and the demand for fresh, organic produce. Lappe's strong use of ethos while defending the food movement is made evident at the very beginning of the article, "We can tell you that the level of awareness and concern for the food we are eating is higher than it has ever been" (Lappe). Though the article relies mainly on real life examples, surveys and statistics to showcase consumer interest in organic products, it is Lappe's use of Ethos that convinces the reader of the movement. The author appeals to audiences because of her credibility and comes off as a well-informed, relatable American. This rhetorical approach works in favor of the author's credibility and argument because readers do not feel overwhelmed or bullied into believing in the trend, and simply agree with their argument based solely on facts. Without this approach, The food movement is small? Not from where we sit, it isn't., would not gain reader's trust and fail to prove the food movement's momentum and prevalence. 

Both authors immediately establish credibility with readers by claiming their day-to-day interactions with consumers, farmers and retailers about food buying choices. Changing attitudes in America in relation to what we eat, where it comes from and what affects it has on our body have created urgency for organic produce. Because Lappe portrays herself as an educated, directly involved author in contrast to uninvolved, research based critics, she appears more relatable, and thus more credible, to readers. Establishing authority on the topic in the title works in the author's favor because it clearly states what the article is arguing against in a creative, sassy way. In the beginning, the author establishes credibility by appealing to Kairos and working to disprove another author's thesis that America has lost interest in the food movement. By addressing and immediately disproving this competing thesis with logos, Lappe gains reader's attention and trust. Her use of logos acknowledges counter arguments and seamlessly disproves them. She admits that conventionally grown foods make up the majority of what American's buy on a daily basis, but counteracts this with the fact that not enough organic supply exists to meet its demand. Her main claim amidst the logos is that demand for organic foods is growing too fast for the industry to handle, and is only limited by lack of supply. She is extremely successful in that her facts are easy to understand, pointed and shocking. Readers cannot help but be assured of the food movement's momentum and prevalence with examples from Walmart, Costco, Coca-Cola and farmers markets. Lappe's choice of title, reassurance of credibility and immediate logos all work well in establishing authority on the subject. 

Lappe's tone convinces audiences of her goodwill. Her sentence structure and choice of words conveys a relaxed, non-stuffy argument that talks to readers and not at them. Her sassy and sarcastic title intrigues readers from the get go and sets up the tone of the article. By expressing herself as sassy and sarcastic, Lappe is relatable to audiences. Although some may argue that sass can be off-putting and abrasive, it works in her favor throughout this essay because it makes her appear more casual and relatable to readers. Her tone makes her memorable and overall, makes the essay easier to read. The down-to-earth tone accurately creates goodwill towards the audience and express concern for the well being of each reader. The use of phrases like, "I don't know about you, but that sounds like a food movement to us" (Lappe), directly involves the reader in the article. This approach assures audiences that they are not being bullied into siding with Lappe, but only convinced of the movement through facts, like a friendly conversation. She develops a thorough argument as to why organic supply does not meet demand, centering her blame on not lack of consumer interest, but failure of the government to subsidize and support organic farming. She states, "We've heard personally from", the large food companies on not being able to meet public demand for organic products to further establish this credibility. She deploys pathos to empathize with readers who struggle to satisfy their organic needs due to high prices and lack of availability. Lappe's tone is sympathetic, assured and relatable throughout the article to successfully assure readers of her goodwill. 

The author's non-patronizing and situated ethos successfully establishes the credibility of her logos. Lappe begins with ethos before even uttering a word due to the date and medium of publication. Her article is in the Washington Post, which has high user accessibility and established credibility. Her argument is in response to an article published stating that a food movement does not exist and is thus presented at a very ideal time. Her situated ethos and careful logos establish her credibility with readers. She directs the conversation to exhibit the varying degrees of change in the food market, using farm-to-school programs as an example. Although readers more than likely do not know what this means, she effectively introduces the farm-to-school idea in a non-patronizing way and strengthens her argument through the example. Her inclusive ethos, "The food movement we are apart of" (Lappe), encompasses every reader and begs readers to look at the bigger picture of the trend. Her ethos effectively works to display her credibility and logos. 

In Anna Lappe's "The food movement is small? Not from where we sit, it isn't.," she uses a relaxed, well-informed, relatable tone to emphasize her ethos and establish credibility with the reader. Her tone successfully demonstrates goodwill and authority over the topic, without bullying the reader into choosing a side in the argument. Without relating directly to readers or addressing counterarguments intelligently, her argument would not be as strong and she would fail to establish credibility with her audience. Most readers would find it hard not to agree with the logos in the article or difficult to dislike the author. Her sassy and sarcastic tone, although some may argue this can destroy a writer and make the essay off-putting, works in her favor to make her more relatable to audiences because it forces the essay to become more casual. Her final statement convinces readers that they themselves are apart of this movement, all they have to do is look around them, and accurately alludes to the big change coming in America, "But we can see it happening across the country  --  in grocery stores, school cafeterias, on family farms. And even in the halls of Congress" (Lappe). This appropriately concludes her argument and offers the reader no other choice but to embrace the healthy, prevalent food movement. 

