The transmission of knowledge between the writers and the audience depends on effective communication and the use of appropriate strategies related to language. The documentary is directed by award-winning filmmaker Ben Proudfoot. He is an entrepreneur and a former magician. His experience reveals his interest in exploring the “Salt” fish and chip sector. This can be verified by the fact that the documentary involves the aspects related to entrepreneurship, a recipe to inspire like a magician and the representation of ideas as a director. The report aims to identify the lifecycle of the fish and chips business launched by Salt and the points that facilitated empty outlets and low brand recognition. The director used rhetorical devices effectively to present his case. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get an original essay The documentary gives insight into the transition from a successful and well-known company to a less recognized and financially weak company. The director reviewed Haddon Salt's passion in building the fish and chip empire. His documentary identified how a focus on the integrity of the vision and not the financial side led to the company being replaced by KFC. Salt's vision was to develop a culture of cracked fish and chips with the right method and proportion of ingredients which contributed to huge success in the early stages. However, the entry of KFC changed the market as they got used to the strategies used by Salez very well, but keeping in consideration the profit objective. Therefore, they have expanded the market by providing customers with fried chicken and related products. The transition facilitated the decline of the Salt business. The directors used rhetorical choices to make a strong argument and get a specific reaction from the audience. The audience for the documentary is made up of individuals who have a keen interest in the old fashioned and traditional taste of fish and chips offered by Salt. The director used rhetorical choices as a linguistic means. It involved implementing a specific form of sentence structure, music or meaning trend with the aim of developing a certain response from the target audience. One of the rhetorical choices used by the director is allusion. Allusion refers to position in relation to a particular event, place or individual. The example of this is a position of someone who does not change quickly because he is not a Superman. In this example, Superman is a well-known character who helped make a point without explaining the reason in detail. Similarly, the documentary's director used the allusion when referring to his first visit to the main Disneyland park in Anaheim. The manager confirmed that he felt the same level of enthusiasm when he walked into the Salt fast food chain in the mall. Visiting the original Disneyland park to see the creator's grand vision was as sensational as walking into the fast food chain to eat fish and chips. The outcome of the choice used by the author has a positive effect on the target audience. First of all, the impact of the choice is to have the feeling of attending the very first theme park, which gave birth to a new marketing technique. The author made the audience understand that originality is linked to cultural identity. The choice made by the director helped him identify the joy of lunching at the best fast food chain of the 70s, which started the trend of fried fish and chips. THEfeeling could not have been presented by the directors as indicated by the use of allusion. The implementation of the allusion created an element of awe by presenting the director's true joy and feeling about his visit to the fast food chain. The director uses rhetorical questions in the documentary in an attempt to present an argument. The questions were developed without any expectation of having an answer. Another purpose of the questions was to motivate the target audience to view the questions as a message or perspective. This is because a well-phrased question can convince the audience. The audience believes the position taken by the speaker. This is exactly what the documentary director did. The choice of rhetorical question used by the director can be verified by the following questions he asked. He asked questions such as “Which is more important to success, integrity of vision or success based on financial stability?” » Does scale matter and bigger is always better? » What is the main difference between Colonel Sanders and Haddon Salt? Additionally, he asked questions such as "should the founders be the ones to be revered" and "where can you get good fish and chips these days?" These questions can be understood in the sense that the filmmakers tried to inform the audience about the steps Salt should take to succeed. The company must choose strategies that can provide a financial advantage and help it sustain itself in the market, as KFC did. They have improved the product line over time. Additionally, Salt needs to work on business expansion, but also quality to succeed in the fast food industry. Additionally, it is imperative that the company brings new ideas that fit with the founder's original concept. The director asked a number of questions at the end of the documentary as part of the argument he wanted to make. His argument was that the integrity of the vision was important because it led to ultimate success and financial stability. The Salt fast food chain was empty and the fish and chips he ordered were not good. In the documentary, Mr Salt said success only depends on when the right method is used. This means that at present the method of making fish and chips is not correct and the roots are not being followed. Additionally, unlike KFC, marketing needs and innovation are currently not part of Salt's business. Plus, the director's point is that bigger isn't always better. It is not imperative that the scale be larger, but the critical point is taste and good manners. The director's use of the rhetorical question is effective because the questions effectively identify his point of view. In the case of a rhetorical question, the answer condition is not implicit. Likewise, the director did not ask for a response. However, the questions allowed him to highlight the information, the public knows it. Using a rhetorical question is more tempting than risky because the director implemented it correctly to get the audience thinking about the concept. In other words, the questions brought back the director's point of view with enthusiasm. But one limitation is that the director abused the rhetorical question. This weakens the effectiveness of the choice slightly, as they won't be effective when the director would actually need to use the choice to make their point. Therefore, rhetorical questions should only be used to clarify crucial points. The newspaper was talking about the king of fish and.