Fun play on the name of the chicken. Keeps it engaging.

All of these big claims are backed up by research.

I could have linked this back to the research better. For example, refer to specific studies on how lighting schedules affect chicken rest cycles.

It might be beneficial to be more clear about the perches and what the research says. For example how big or wide are they supposed to be to contribute to good animal welfare.

I'm assuming here that readers will know that excessive light makes chicken uncomfortable, thus contributing to poor welfare.

I couldn't find a way to embed audio in that would look appealing so I added the audio overtop of the images.

Citing pictures

Scrolling affects are also being used to keep the reader engaged with the narration and research. It makes the story more immersive and entertaining.

I'm trying to blend fact and fiction together, as the evidence about light in factory cages is coming from a secondary source. However I only cited with a number, which is linked at the bottom with the corresponding number. I could have made the citation a little more clear while reading.

I'm also using a multimodal method of combining imagery and audio cues with narration to show what I'm narrating, as well as what each environment would sound like. This method is meant to appeal to the audiences emotions as well as their understanding. It's also trying to create an immersive environment for the audience.

I'm using the Five Freedoms of welfare framework to base my narration and research on.

Furthermore, I could have furthered my research in economic factors of egg production, consumer perspectives, and industry reports.

I could have used quantitative approaches such as with charts. I also could have used an ethnographic method where I interviewed individuals who owned chickens to get a more nuanced story.

I am also making a consumption that all readers share a concern for animal welfare and they might help.

I am assuming that backyard farms are inherently better when not all research is conducive to this assumption. However, I did explicitly say that just according to the Five Freedoms - which I should have stated - the research indicates they are better. Though it doesn't account for every single backyard farm.

I relied very heavily on animal welfare organizations and scientific poultry studies. They are a mix of peer-reviewed and action-orientated research. Thus I was bias to picking narratives that highlighted cruelty for the purpose of the assignment. I could have included opposing views within the story if I wanted it to be more nuanced.

I'm making it clear now that I am contrasting industrial chicken farming to backyard methods of chicken farming. This is a comparative analysis method.

This statement might be a bit of an assumption. Some evidence did suggest that chickens do love to be in nesting areas but I don't remember the evidence being explicitly clear about this. Hence no citation. I could rely a bit more of statistical data.

Again, I'm blending fact and fiction together while assuming that my reader won't be confused.

Here I'm using vivid descriptions as a narrative method. I'm embodying the chicken's perspective in a fictional first-person.

Here I assume that the reader already knows about the "Five Freedoms" of animals welfare. I should have defined what these were before going on. I may have done this to shorten the content.

Here I am using a definition/ethical framework to ground my story in in the beginning. I was hoping this would situate the reader for what they would be reading about as they continued.