The article Why Does Alex Acosta Still Have a Job? is easily one of the most persuasive articles that I've read. It was hard to fight the feelings of disgust that rose up as I read through it, despite the knowledge that I was reading it to critique the argument and not for information. The topic of the article was the main source of persuasion. Any member of the public would be enraged at the idea of an abusive man getting out of his deserved punishment. On top of the emotionally stirring topic, Goldberg continued to use inflammatory language throughout her writing to incite more negative feelings towards Alex Acosta.
The author herself has several years of writing and reporting experience. She has written three books and won a Pulitzer Prize for reporting on workplace sexual harassment issues. Before working for The New York Times she was a columnist for Slate and had her work appear in other publications. While she doesn't have any law experience listed, her previous work in reporting makes her a trusted source for information.
Goldberg did briefly mention an argument from the other side's perspective but I think her article would be stronger if she included more opinions from the other side along with her rebuttals. Even though the intense language stirs up a lot of emotions, I think she should spend a little bit more time on the facts that way she can reach a wider audience. Overall it was a good article that swayed me to Goldberg's side however I think more people would be moved with just a few changes.
The author herself has several years of writing and reporting experience. She has written three books and won a Pulitzer Prize for reporting on workplace sexual harassment issues. Before working for The New York Times she was a columnist for Slate and had her work appear in other publications. While she doesn't have any law experience listed, her previous work in reporting makes her a trusted source for information.
Goldberg did briefly mention an argument from the other side's perspective but I think her article would be stronger if she included more opinions from the other side along with her rebuttals. Even though the intense language stirs up a lot of emotions, I think she should spend a little bit more time on the facts that way she can reach a wider audience. Overall it was a good article that swayed me to Goldberg's side however I think more people would be moved with just a few changes.
Comments