Reader Response #5: "The Wal-Mart You Don't Know"

    In “The Wal-Mart You Don’t Know” Charles Fishman executed the perfect scare tactic to terrify American consumers. Fishman’s lengthy article proved to be intelligent and bold as he informed America on the “not just the world’s largest retailer. (But) the world’s largest company (553).” He instantly grabs the reader’s attention by opening with the story of Vlassic’s gallon jar of pickles and the fall of the company because of Wal-Mart’s guarantee of the lowest prices around. Although Fishman writes a very a long article, his flow of writing makes it easy to get through and comprehend due to his knowledge on past workers and manufacturers. He reveals the success of companies like Dial and the fall of American factories for companies such as Lovable, Huffy, and Levi’s due to the incredible sales of Wal-Mart and the amount of business they hold for their employers. At some points in Fishmans’s article, there seemed to be no hope for an redemption or counter argument for Wal-Mart. He spent most of the article demonizing Wal-Mart as a business of interrogation, forcing companies to change the way they do business for Wal-Mart to sell their products. His argument strengthened towards the conclusion, when he featured opinions from Wal-Mart supporters that claimed “(Wal-Mart) has helped everything-customer focus, inventory management, speed to market (540).” Fishman then topped it all off with a strong call to action, that “it is we as shoppers who have the power, and who have given that power to Wal-Mart (541)” suggesting that we have contributed to this frightening problem as consumers, but we don't have to let outsourcing and weak profit gain continue.
    I have hear many horror stories about the way Wal-Mart treats their employees, but I have  never been informed on the truth behind Wal-Mart’s shockingly low prices that give the company its edge. After reading the article, I visited the companies website to their logo “Save Money. Live Better” and previews of the cheapest deals on electronics around. I can no longer help but to think who is living better and of what those companies are having to go through in order to have their products sold at Wal-Mart. What amazes me even more is the fact that Wal-Mart has actually achieved such feats, that one company can hold the singly largest profits for one manufacturer, that one company can become the largest in the world, and that one company can put so many Americans into unemployment. I can only imagine what the future hold for such a company.

Reader Response #4: Social Connections

    Steve Johnson’s essay Social Connections reviews the New York Times column by Thomas Friedman as well as illustrates Johnson’s opinions on the topic of the use of new technology. Johnson begins his essay with the arguments made by Friedman, that “technology can make the far feel near. But it can also make the near feel far” (414). Johnson uses this argument to demonstrate a comparison between the passionate claim made by Friedman and his own view as he states “I am a bit less worried than Friedman is about the social disconnection for the connected age” (414). Johnson then uses the second half of his essay to describe how he feels  about the topic, that in fact it does “give us better opportunities” (415). Johnson’s style used in this essay with half of his writing spent on explaining one argument, and the second half describing his own proves for an ineffective, underdeveloped argument. Johnson attempts to make a good argument, but fails to execute his purpose as he does not fully develop his own views matched up against a more compelling, bolder argument than his own.
    Johnson provides a great question to ask his readers for discussion. After analyzing Friedman’s column and explaining his own position on the use of technology, Johnson asks, “so the question becomes: how important is face-to-face?” (415). I believe face-to-face is the most valuable form of communication society can use. There is an intimacy and sense of closeness achieved when people meet face-to-face that can not be replaced otherwise. I also believe there is value in technology, especially in Facebook and the new smart phones. I use both of these new technologies in my every day life to keep in touch with my friends and family, contact classmates, and check in with my outside work. I use a smart phone to check my e-mail and save time by being connected to the Internet whenever I need it, which is quite often as a college student. But even though I advocate for these products’ significance, I hold personal, face-to-face time higher. In fact, when I spend quality time with my close friends or my boyfriend, I like to put my cell phone away somewhere where I will not even see it to avoid distraction. Even in the progressive age of high education and professional working, society still has a lot of learning to do and growth to be achieved in the development of new technology.

Reader Response #3: the Singer Solution to World Poverty

    Peter Singer’s essay, The Singer Solution to World Poverty is an essay that addresses the problem with American consumers and their contribution to the ongoing problem of thousands of  people living in poverty all over the world dying every year. Singer makes a detailed argument discussing the current problems with the way America spends their money needlessly on activities and luxuries such as dining out at a favorite restaurant. Singer then explains his radical solution, that Americans should redirect all unnecessary income to organizations aiding victims of poverty.
    There were many aspects of his essay I found to be to extreme and unrealistic as I was reading through it. For starters, his title is very boastful and self-centered, “The Singer Soultion….” I was confused as to why he felt the solution needed to be named after him, yes of course he did come up with it, but it goes against one of his main points in his essay, the problem with the greediness of Americans. If Singer truly wishes that Americans would ask “what is one month’s dining out, compared to a child’s life?”, would he be willing to ask “What is my name’s worth, compared to a child’s life?” (329)? Singer’s attempt of effectiveness lost some credibility here when writing of the action of humility. On the other hand, aside from Singer’s choice in title, his essay was effectively organized. One example of this is his clear refutation statement in his essay. He spends a chunk of paragraphs at the end of his essay addressing the question, “So why should I give my fair share?”, and continuing to answer that question according to his theories (330). His answer to the counter argument showed that Singer is prepared for the complaining and excuses that his audience will react to his essay with.
    After the first read through of the essay, I thought Singer’s argument was way too extreme and he spent too much time on trying to guilt trip his reader rather than present a possible solution to poverty. But after analyzing the text, my feelings changed about the essay. I do believe some of his claims such as “you shouldn’t buy that new car, take that cruise,...or get that pricey new suit” are asking too much of Americans, especially full-time workers who put in their fair share of hours for their luxuries (330). But, I also believe that with poverty remaining such a serious problem in our world, Americans need these radical ideas and extreme allegations to even spark an interest. If there is no people in America making an attempt to be the voice of the unheard and impoverished all over the world, we would have no reason to worry about others if we feel secure in our homes and jobs. When Americans have something amazing, like a house and plenty of food, we tend to hold onto in order to keep ourselves safe. I know that if I never heard of any organizations helping overseas, I would assume that everyone will be well off like me and I should should treasure the luxuries I have because other people may not get the opportunity to have the same things I do. This is why we need people like Peter Singer.

Reader Response #2: The Dangerous Myth of Grade Inflation

Alfie Kohn’s  The Dangerous Myth of Grade Inflation is a lengthy essay illustrating his position on the counter argument to the recent trend of claims in the academic world, the rise of grade inflation. Kohn takes a firm stance on the absurdity of the idea of grade inflation possibilities, that in fact “it is hard to substantiate even the simple claim that grades have been rising” (62). Kohn makes an intelligent, well-developed argument as shown by his length in content, essay format, and appeal of ethos.
     Although the essay did take quite a bit of time for me to read, I believe the length of Kohn’s essay helped to strengthen his argument. Kohn used plenty of citations of statistical research in the first half of his essay to show facts and figures before he explained his own theory, such as, the analysis of the reports completed by the American Academy of Arts and Sciences and Harvard University (63). This tactic was very strategic, because it gave the reader a chance to read the content that is typically more dense before he or she could process the meat of his essay. He then continues to go through the claims of his opposers, “the assumptions that seem to underline the grave warnings about grade inflation”, and how he believes the claims can be defeated (65). The format of Kohn’s essay exercises the appeal of ethos by spending a few pages on the background of the topic before he addresses his own opinions, establishing his credibility to the reader. 
    My personal response is focused on the major weakness I found in the piece. This weakness came to mind while I was analyzing a sub-point off of Kohn’s use of ethos in his essay, his use of language. I found his use of language to be intimidating, which made it unclear if I (a freshman in college) was a part of his intended audience. With large, complex sentences like “A focus on grades creates, or at least perpetuates, and extrinsic orientation that is likely to undermine the love of learning we are presumably seeking to promote”, I felt a sense of distance from Kohn’s ideas because I had to look up the definitions of the words he used so casually. This use of wordy language made it hard for the reading to flow, due to the constant need to re-read the passages. I was constantly pausing to try and understand what I just read, and found that I took a lot of breaks and got distracted. I believe I could have developed a stronger opinion on the topic if I could understand what he was talking about in all point of his essay. Kohn’s sophisticated essay is a strong argument on the myths of grade inflation intended for an audience as intelligent as he is.

Reader Response #1: Violent Media is Good for Kids

    Gerard Jones’ Violent Media is Good for Kids is a media studies piece that uses powerful 
testimonies and logic to persuade the reader that violent media liberates children from their fears and dependencies. This passage was engaging and relatable. Jones successfully caused me to think twice about the way I associate media violence and the child development. He explained that regardless of how much violence we are exposed to, “Children will feel rage” (232). Not only do children feel the need to act out as Jones argues, but they need a way to learn how to expose of it and deal with it, otherwise “we shelter them not against violence but against power and selfhood” (233).
    After reading the essay I realized violence for Jones and many other kids was used as the tool for the same kind of escapism I used as a child. I grew up in a daycare center for most of my childhood, so I know what it is like to use your fantasies and imagination as a way to develop social skills and overcome fears. I admit to being a introverted, shy child; but, I was able to overcome that through playing with my friends in imaginary worlds and story lines that did consist of violent themes and characters. Remembering back, I recall yes, there were imaginary guns; yes, we could die in our games; and yes, most of us are all civilized young adults today. When children play games with “good guys” and “bad guys” they are distinguishing the general difference between right and wrong, and what those character traits include. Jones’ essay reminded me to not jump to any hasty conclusions, but to re-think this topic and reflect on how I used to play games as a child.
    Jones’ article used to appeal of logos to persuade the reader of his stance on this argument. H used testimonies such as the story of one little girl and her aggressive play times and another of an older girl who turned to rap music for a form of expression. Both girls were mentally stable and successfully functioning in society. The two stories contrast in content, but help Jones come to the conclusion that “it’s helped hundreds of people for every one it’s hurt” (232). By using these personal stories, Jones makes a valid point in his argument defending the imagination of children and their violent stories.