Organization and Rhetoric in “Is the Business World All About Greed?” Nicholas Kristof is a bi-weekly, periodic op-ed columnist for the New York Times. His articles focus on social issues, ranging from women’s rights to health care, and global affairs including those in third world countries. Kristof is a Harvard graduate, and he has studied and lived abroad and speaks multiple languages. Also, he is a recipient of two Pulitzer Prizes. In the article “Is the Business World All About Greed?” by Nicholas Kristof, Kristof utilizes tone, organization, and exemplification in order to convince the audience, especially business students, that the business world can be used for good. Throughout the article, Kristof manages to keep a casual, light-hearted,
…show more content…
At the beginning, he introduces the question of whether or not businesses can be moral. He mentions that the question is one that he is “periodically asked,” which gives him first-hand credibility. In addition, his personal encounter with this issue demonstrates its potential severity and influence. Then, he connects the idea of morality with helping the community. Kristof states that “companies must do far more to benefit the 99 percent, not just the 1 percent.” In this statement, he takes the common phrase of “the 1 percent” and flips it so that the emphasis is on society; thus, his argument is simplified and focused, and he only has to prove that businesses can help the community. After the first paragraph, he admits the existence of bad businesses, and he uses analogies between big businesses and people with power. Kristof claims that “American tobacco executives have killed more people than Stalin managed to, and pharma executives recklessly peddling opioids may have killed as many people as Colombian drug lords.” The majority of the audience will know who Stalin and Colombian drug lords are, and the two hold strong negative connotations, which increases the effectiveness of the analogies. By using these in particular, Kristof essentially compares American tobacco to a dictator and pharmaceutical companies to drug dealers. Plus, he directly asserts that both are killers and morally bad. However, this supports …show more content…
Each of his examples supports his views without being redundant. In each example, an issue and an organization along with its CEO is introduced. The three CEO’s run their organizations in different parts of the world, and their organizations exist to solve different issues. Sasha Kramer works SOIL in Haiti, which has problems with “a lack of toilets and declining soil fertility.” Christie Peacock is the founder of Saidai, which functions in Kenya. They experience problems with “medicine or other agricultural supplies for sale [that] are fake or substandard.” Christopher Mikkelsen runs Refunite worldwide to help refugees find missing family members. Hence, Kristof shows the audience that good businesses can be found on a global scale, which implies that good businesses are common. Next, Kristof presents the business partners of these organizations. In particular, he mentions that Christopher Mikkelsen’s organization, Refunite, is supported by two dozen companies. He emphasizes that “cellphone operators and Facebook” are among those two dozen. Kristof recognizes that the audience will find “cellphone operators and Facebook” familiar. The idea of multi-billionaire companies cooperating with a smaller organization stands out to the audience. In turn, this idea offers a solution for those wondering what big businesses can do to be good. Thus, Kristof proves that good businesses exist and that big businesses have the
At the beginning, he introduces the question of whether or not businesses can be moral. He mentions that the question is one that he is “periodically asked,” which gives him first-hand credibility. In addition, his personal encounter with this issue demonstrates its potential severity and influence. Then, he connects the idea of morality with helping the community. Kristof states that “companies must do far more to benefit the 99 percent, not just the 1 percent.” In this statement, he takes the common phrase of “the 1 percent” and flips it so that the emphasis is on society; thus, his argument is simplified and focused, and he only has to prove that businesses can help the community. After the first paragraph, he admits the existence of bad businesses, and he uses analogies between big businesses and people with power. Kristof claims that “American tobacco executives have killed more people than Stalin managed to, and pharma executives recklessly peddling opioids may have killed as many people as Colombian drug lords.” The majority of the audience will know who Stalin and Colombian drug lords are, and the two hold strong negative connotations, which increases the effectiveness of the analogies. By using these in particular, Kristof essentially compares American tobacco to a dictator and pharmaceutical companies to drug dealers. Plus, he directly asserts that both are killers and morally bad. However, this supports …show more content…
Each of his examples supports his views without being redundant. In each example, an issue and an organization along with its CEO is introduced. The three CEO’s run their organizations in different parts of the world, and their organizations exist to solve different issues. Sasha Kramer works SOIL in Haiti, which has problems with “a lack of toilets and declining soil fertility.” Christie Peacock is the founder of Saidai, which functions in Kenya. They experience problems with “medicine or other agricultural supplies for sale [that] are fake or substandard.” Christopher Mikkelsen runs Refunite worldwide to help refugees find missing family members. Hence, Kristof shows the audience that good businesses can be found on a global scale, which implies that good businesses are common. Next, Kristof presents the business partners of these organizations. In particular, he mentions that Christopher Mikkelsen’s organization, Refunite, is supported by two dozen companies. He emphasizes that “cellphone operators and Facebook” are among those two dozen. Kristof recognizes that the audience will find “cellphone operators and Facebook” familiar. The idea of multi-billionaire companies cooperating with a smaller organization stands out to the audience. In turn, this idea offers a solution for those wondering what big businesses can do to be good. Thus, Kristof proves that good businesses exist and that big businesses have the