Analysis of Virgin Airlines Commercial

When the video started I wasn’t sure what it was an advertisement for. It seemed to be about something much more important than an airline. Looking at it from a rhetorical perspective it seemed to make going on a flight a more important task. It made me think that flying is actually a big deal, and the people that take care of you on said flight should be skilled at any particular job they have.

Wade puts the add in context by explaining facts as to why there were two women and a black men as the stewardesses and steward, and the two white men were the pilot and engineer. White men were originally stewards until World War II when men went overseas and women had to take over their jobs. There was once a ban on female flight attendants, and that was reversed to males being banned as flight attendants for an amount of time. But it was perfectly fine to have a black, male flight attendant because it was “natural” for them to serve people just like it was “natural” for women to serve people, also. This commercial seemed to be a perfect portrayal of these notions.

After reading Wade’s article I noticed many of the points she had mad. The advertisement was a definite example of race and gender discrimination. The only people that had jobs that weren’t to serve other people were white males. After reading the article I understood what was going on in general and in a deeper way, also. It was an advertisement for an airline that acted like if someone worked for them they had to be above the rest, but the ones that could only truly do the absolute best were white males.

Regarding ethos, pathos and logos, Wade utilized all three in her article. An example of ethos is when she gave a short history on stewards, showing that she was knowledgeable of the subject. She hadn’t just put her feelings in to her article; she did some research, too. When Wade explained how black men and white women would do this somewhat domestic job because it seemed “natural,” she...