SOAPSTONE and Tone
Speaker: the speaker is Nicholas Kristof. He seems to be a well educated man and very aware of the people’s beliefs and ideas. This is evident in the article because approaches the opposing argument about government benefits with facts and figures. The whole article is written in a “matter-of-fact” sort of style. He’s probably concerned for the well being of everyone- fairness seems to be a factor in his argument.
Occasion: “The war on poverty” turned 50 years old on the week of January eighth. People seem to believe (according to the article) that government aid, such as welfare and food stamps, are hindering America’s economic growth. However, Kristof argues that America has come a long way in defeating poverty. Without government aid America would have unsupportable poverty rates.
Audience: Kristof is writing to probably middle to upper class citizens. These people usually don’t depend on government welfare so it may be harder for them to see its benefits. Kristof is speaking to those who believe that government aid is harming America.
Purpose: Kristof writes this to give his audience a reality check. I feel like this article shows the sunny side of government aid. He also gives solution to the poverty problem saying that the root of poverty starts with our youth and if we want to reduce government aid we shouldn’t invest so much in the elderly, but in the children.
Subject: The subject of this topic is how the government has helped in America’s anti-poverty battle. America has been able to drastically reduce poverty rates because of government benefits. The battle against poverty isn’t over, but progress is being made.
Tone: The author has a very factual and educated tone. While reading this article, I felt that Kristof was confident about his topic. He successfully approached the opposing arguments. He even challenges readers by saying, "So lets drop the bombast and look at the evidence." Kristof's says it "is just wrong" to be in opposition to government benefits. His opinion is very clear throughout the article backing up everything he says with facts. In one instance he compares the poverty rates among the elderly in 1960- 35 percent- to the poverty rates in 2012- only nine percent. He also talks about the fallen teenage birthrate and specialized programs that helped bring change (Carreer Academies, Nurse-Family Partnership, etc.). In doing so, Kristof appeals to logos- the logical reasoning behind his argument. He tells the opposition they're wrong and why they're wrong. However he is not arrogant or rude about it; he does it with class.
Occasion: “The war on poverty” turned 50 years old on the week of January eighth. People seem to believe (according to the article) that government aid, such as welfare and food stamps, are hindering America’s economic growth. However, Kristof argues that America has come a long way in defeating poverty. Without government aid America would have unsupportable poverty rates.
Audience: Kristof is writing to probably middle to upper class citizens. These people usually don’t depend on government welfare so it may be harder for them to see its benefits. Kristof is speaking to those who believe that government aid is harming America.
Purpose: Kristof writes this to give his audience a reality check. I feel like this article shows the sunny side of government aid. He also gives solution to the poverty problem saying that the root of poverty starts with our youth and if we want to reduce government aid we shouldn’t invest so much in the elderly, but in the children.
Subject: The subject of this topic is how the government has helped in America’s anti-poverty battle. America has been able to drastically reduce poverty rates because of government benefits. The battle against poverty isn’t over, but progress is being made.
Tone: The author has a very factual and educated tone. While reading this article, I felt that Kristof was confident about his topic. He successfully approached the opposing arguments. He even challenges readers by saying, "So lets drop the bombast and look at the evidence." Kristof's says it "is just wrong" to be in opposition to government benefits. His opinion is very clear throughout the article backing up everything he says with facts. In one instance he compares the poverty rates among the elderly in 1960- 35 percent- to the poverty rates in 2012- only nine percent. He also talks about the fallen teenage birthrate and specialized programs that helped bring change (Carreer Academies, Nurse-Family Partnership, etc.). In doing so, Kristof appeals to logos- the logical reasoning behind his argument. He tells the opposition they're wrong and why they're wrong. However he is not arrogant or rude about it; he does it with class.