Charles Lane, in his weekly column from the The Washington Post, consistently uses facts and figure, a concerned tone, and a cause and effect expository mode in order to convey his argument about a current issue. However, he uses varying levels of sophistication in the three articles “The GOP’s health-care plan goes in the exact wrong direction,” “Who is to blame for the opioid epidemic,” and “Rahm Emanuel gears up for a modern day- Brown v. Board.”
Lane supports each of his arguments with ample quantitative facts and figures. In his March 22nd column on the misdirection of the GOP’s proposed healthcare plan, he uses relevant statistics about who uses medicare. To support his claim that there is little to be gained by linking Medicaid with …show more content…
In his May 22nd article, he is worried that there is “precious little to be gained” from linking employment and healthcare (“The GOP’s”). The author’s concern imbues readers with a sense of urgency and makes them more receptive to his plans, which he presents at the end of the article. He expresses concern with a concluding question in the second to last paragraph: “Where does the buck stop for 183,000 lives avoidably lost?” (“Who is to blame”). In this quote, he is clearly disturbed by the volume of deaths from overdoses, and troubled that little is being done to curtail overdose deaths. In a similar manner, in his most recent article, Lane says that what’s important in the Brown v. Board case is not the details of the case, but “the fact that [the case] has to occur in the first place” (“Rahm Emanuel”). He is concerned and frustrated by the fact that cases about discrimination, which should have been resolved decades earlier, are still being fought in courts …show more content…
In his article about healthcare, he uses relatively simple diction throughout the article. Meanwhile, in his article about the modern opioid epidemic, he uses the words “apocryphally” and “apropos,” (“Who is to blame”). These words elevate the level of discussion and build his ethos. A more sophisticated style is also employed in his article about Rahm Emanuel, in which he uses the word “imperiling” and the esoteric phrase “proximate cause” (“Rahm Emanuel”). These words have the same effect. An article about the GOP’s health-care plan is likely to be read by more people who would not understand difficult terminology, and thus employs easier words. Meanwhile, article about opioids and a modern court case would probably be read mostly by people interested in that topic who are more likely to understand the difficult
Lane supports each of his arguments with ample quantitative facts and figures. In his March 22nd column on the misdirection of the GOP’s proposed healthcare plan, he uses relevant statistics about who uses medicare. To support his claim that there is little to be gained by linking Medicaid with …show more content…
In his May 22nd article, he is worried that there is “precious little to be gained” from linking employment and healthcare (“The GOP’s”). The author’s concern imbues readers with a sense of urgency and makes them more receptive to his plans, which he presents at the end of the article. He expresses concern with a concluding question in the second to last paragraph: “Where does the buck stop for 183,000 lives avoidably lost?” (“Who is to blame”). In this quote, he is clearly disturbed by the volume of deaths from overdoses, and troubled that little is being done to curtail overdose deaths. In a similar manner, in his most recent article, Lane says that what’s important in the Brown v. Board case is not the details of the case, but “the fact that [the case] has to occur in the first place” (“Rahm Emanuel”). He is concerned and frustrated by the fact that cases about discrimination, which should have been resolved decades earlier, are still being fought in courts …show more content…
In his article about healthcare, he uses relatively simple diction throughout the article. Meanwhile, in his article about the modern opioid epidemic, he uses the words “apocryphally” and “apropos,” (“Who is to blame”). These words elevate the level of discussion and build his ethos. A more sophisticated style is also employed in his article about Rahm Emanuel, in which he uses the word “imperiling” and the esoteric phrase “proximate cause” (“Rahm Emanuel”). These words have the same effect. An article about the GOP’s health-care plan is likely to be read by more people who would not understand difficult terminology, and thus employs easier words. Meanwhile, article about opioids and a modern court case would probably be read mostly by people interested in that topic who are more likely to understand the difficult