Final revisions will contain these important ideas to ensure your understanding

Final revisions will contain these important ideas to ensure your understanding

Final revisions will contain these important ideas to ensure your understanding of marketing, food labeling, and propaganda as well as the organizational pattern of the Toulmin method:
You are submitting a 6-page (six-page) paper in MLA 9 format utilizing the organizational methods of the Toulmin Method to argue about how propaganda tactics on a food package, whether good or bad, omits nutritional and other necessary information consumers may need in order to make autonomous dietary decisions
Analyze the semiotics (color, shape, size, material, font, etc.), of the food package to create the grounds for your argument.
In addition, analyze three (3) methods of propaganda the package uses, and how propaganda impacts the consumer as your warrant.
Incorporate research of the food item as your backing to further your argument on whether the food item is a healthy food, or if the propaganda tactics conceal truths. Even if the food item is healthy, consider if the propaganda tactic allow customers to choose their own foods or it intentionally omits information.
Discuss the limitations of your argument, or where you were unable to conduct research, or what products may not be impacted by your research.
Summarize those who are in opposition to you, or the rebuttals consumers and companies may have about the food item/pacaking.
PLEASE ADD 3 METHODS OF PROPAGANDA FROM: 
(1) What is propaganda? | Jason Stanley | Explain It Like I’m Smart by Big Think – YouTube 
AND an additional peer-reviewed source
Step of Toulmin Argument Question This Step Addresses Your Information
Claim What is your argument?
Grounds What is your evidence?
Warrant What reasoning connects your evidence to your argument?
Backing What can you provide as support to convince the reader to agree with your grounds, claim, and warrants?
Qualifier What are the limits of your argument?
Rebuttal What are the objections to your argument––and can you reason that your argument still holds?