ENGAGEMENT ESSAY

“Description begins in the writer’s imagination but should finish in the reader’s,” Stephen King. Creating an argument is never an easy task. The task alone ranges from choosing the right diction, phrasing quotes correctly to help convey purpose, or merely relaying evidence or opinions to the audience. To build an argument that a reader is ready to read and digest thoroughly, the author must be credible, ensure that the information is reliable and certain, and maintain their purpose clear. An opinion editorial article from the New York Times that exemplifies those traits and presents a well-written argument is, The Devastating Consequences of Being Poor in the Digital Age. Written by Mary Madden, a research lead at the Data & Society Research Institute in New York, she disputes the claim that technology has been a benefit to all of society. She presents the argument that the lower-class has been impacted in terms of privacy, financial insecurity and educationally. Madden develops a strong claim to prove that although technology has become a necessity, the repercussions that fall on certain communities due to that dependence is “devastating.” Although effective, Madden’s argument does lack certain aspects that would allow it to emphasize the effects it has had on families, the rise of the digital age, and data insecurity.

CREDIBILITY

One of the reasons why the article makes for a well-written argument is because of the credibility of the author. Mary Madden, as previously mentioned, is a technology research lead at the Data & Society Research Institute in New York. She has led many projects that include studying the “impact of data-centric systems on Americans’ health and well-being”. Equally, before becoming research lead and conducting her project on the impact of technology in underserved communities, she had a been part of the Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University. Because of her experience in the field with digital media and its effects, “she is a nationally-recognized expert [in her field]”. Therefore, when Madden presents her research study claiming that “the poor experience these two extremes — hypervisibility and invisibility — while often lacking the agency or resources to challenge unfair outcomes,” she demonstrates that her work is beyond credible. Likewise, Madden’s study discovered lower-income individuals “expressed heightened sensitivities” over their privacy while off the internet and that “sensitivities” can lead to potential threats. In stating this, she then presents the fact that “the poor must navigate a matrix of privacy and security vulnerabilities in their daily lives — any of which could dramatically upend their financial, professional or social well-being.”

Although the argument based on her findings is strong, many can refute her discoveries as biased. Americans today tend to believe that trust can play an important part in what sources to trust. In a survey from the Press Institute in 2017, it revealed that “Americans rate accuracy as the most important general principle related to trust." An addition that would create emphasis on Madden’s claims and strengthen her assertion would be to incorporate another body of work into her writing. This would allow for the audience to not just take her word for it but to examine a different study and make a thoughtful decision on its findings. One piece of work that would strengthen the argument would be in the book High Technology and Low-income Communities. For instance, when it argues “[those] with poor service or no service will be disadvantaged and marginalized… [We should] ensure that members of low-income communities are not further disadvantaged by exclusion from the digital world”. By including this, the audience can examine not only her findings but the opinions of other experts about how marginalized low-income communities are affected by the digital age, such as Madden emphasizes throughout.

RHETORICAL APPEAL

Madden can effectively use the rhetorical appeals throughout her text to help connect with the audience. When the audience, mostly those with access to the internet and can understand the data that is being presented, is being spoken to in the correct terms, they can relate to the text more personally. Using the rhetorical appeal of logos, Madden uses context to help pull forward the notion that communities of color are being impacted. In particular when she writes, “the story of income inequality and differential surveillance practices in America is also deeply intertwined with the history of racial inequalities,” it can be identified as an essential point in her argument. So, when she goes forward presents her data that, “low-income... communities of color, are significantly more likely than higher-income groups to express concerns about being unfairly targeted by law enforcement,” it can be viewed with authority and taken as facts instead of words with no basis.

Moving past the logos presented to her audience, when Madden delivers her point, “from the government surveillance of black civil rights leaders in the 1960s to the surveillance of Black Lives Matter protesters on social media today, there are myriad examples of communities of color enduring a disproportionate level of scrutiny,” it gives the audience a connection. She accomplishes this by using the appeal of kairos to compare the movements in the 1900s to the events occurring today.

Considering this, Madden’s argument could have been further solidified if she had incorporated the use of pathos to best demonstrate how the poor have to confront these realities in their daily lives. For instance, a family who has had to face the unsettling fear of having their privacy invaded online and used against them. Or similarly, a family fearing the precise situation Madden presents as a consequence of having hypervisibility online of “[the] warrantless cellphone location tracking that results in wrongful arrests or pervasive networks of cameras and sensors that monitor all of the public activity in low-income neighborhoods in a constant search for suspicious activity.” Had Madden provided a case where she could portray the firsthand effects of the digital age on the hypervisibility of a low-income and highly marginalized family, the audience could have empathized and given Madden’s argument a clearer foundation. With the use of the rhetorical tool of pathos, Madden could also have been able to form a connection of identity with readers. “[I]ndividuals do not have a simple singular identity. We have different commitments that influence how we see and understand ourselves at any particular moment. These commitments can result in our having different beliefs on a variety of issues,”. Having created that connection between her and the readers, it could have led to a deeper understanding of the situation and perhaps changed the perception of the audience in her favor.

RHETORICAL SITUATION

When analyzing the rhetorical situation in the article, Madden can provide a setting, purpose and a medium. Yet something that I would have enjoyed more often is Madden’s voice throughout. In the article, she presents factual evidence, however, the reason as to why she is arguing there are disadvantages of the digital age to the poor is constantly being clouded by her facts. The balance between the article can be leveled between facts and the voice behind what Madden is writing. Although the lack of voice may seem trivial, it is in fact crucial in terms of today's concern over having an opinion piece. Even having extra sections of her opinion in the editorial would have been a way to further connect with her audience. In this case, one way that I would have liked to see her establish her voice is near her conclusion where she conveys, “the survey findings illustrate a substantial demand for educational resources among low-socioeconomic status groups, but many feel as though it would be difficult to get access to the tools and strategies they would need to learn more about protecting their personal information online.” This would have been an appropriate place for Madden to promote her opinion on the socioeconomic distress technology has placed on low-income families. In this instance, she could have said is “Consequently, I believe that…” and have branched out to have the audience be in on her opinion prominently, something I found necessary during the piece.

CONCLUSION