Introduction
There are many ways to convey information to the audience, each with unique features and peculiarities. These differences are primarily due to the goals pursued by information outlets and the methods they use to implement them. A study of articles by Chetty et al. and Tankersley will be conducted to determine similarities and differences in how these sources present their information.
The article by Chetty et al. is titled “The Fading American Dream: Trends in Absolute Income Mobility Since 1940.” This paper is a scientific study conducted by a group of authors and presented in a scientific journal. The second article is “American Dream Collapsing for Young Adults, Study Says, as Odds Plunge that Children Will Earn More than their Parents” by Tankersley. It is presented in the well-known newspaper The Washington Post. Therefore, although the sources investigate one topic, this text will have significant differences.
Goal
An article by Chetty et al. concerns the American dream and its effect on the socioeconomic status of modern Americans. Authors write about the decline in children’s earnings compared to their parents. They state, “The fraction of children earning more than their parents fell from approximately 90% for children born in 1940 to around 50% for children entering the labor market today” (Chetty et al. 405). The bigger conversation considered in the article is about the upward mobility decline for middle-class Americans. The primary purpose of this work is to draw attention to declining children’s income compared to their parents in modern conditions of income mobility.
The article written by Tankersley raises the topic of the American dream and the income of modern young people. The author emphasizes that “rising income inequality has eroded the ability for American children to grow up to earn more than their parents” (Tankersley para. 1). The main point that the author is trying to prove is the consideration of children’s prospect of earning more compared to their parents and the effect of income mobility, inequality in income, and how that has affected America’s economy. The bigger conversation concerns the decline of income mobility that caused inequality in income division in the country.
Audience
The main participants in the article by Chetty et al. are the policymakers and stakeholders involved in the socio-economic processes. Its audience may also be researchers or students researching this topic within the framework of scientific activities. Scientific vocabulary is used in the work, complete with specialized narrow terms and the article’s publication in a scientific journal, which is clues outside the text. The article by Tankersley focuses on attracting people who want to monitor and engage with how the economy is distributed in society. This article uses simplified language to convey the main message, which is a feature that distinguishes it. The authors have affected themselves more to enlighten the public about economic matters.
Rhetorical Appeals
The article by Tankersley uses a logical appeal that focuses on the quantified need for change that can enable children to out-earn their parents. The researcher stated that “if added together, those tweaks could raise the odds of a child born in the 80s out-earning his or her parents to at least 2 in 3 – though that would still be substantially less than the odds for a child born in 1940” (Tankersley para. 15).
The author relies on emotional appeal through the expression of concern in expressing that “kids born after the 1930s are doing worse relative to their parents than kids born 1900-1930, and kids born in 1970 are not typically doing better than their parents in terms of educational attainment or income” (Tankersley para 21). The ethical appeal is manifested in the inclusion of additional research to support the highlighted claims and the citing of scholarly information used for the article.
In the article by Chetty et al., logical and ethical appeals are also used. Hence, the first one manifests itself in the author’s words about the result of specific indicators of income mobility that have led to inequality. They indicated that “plausible adjustments to children’s incomes are unlikely to change the conclusion that absolute mobility has fallen sharply from the rates of 80-90% experienced by children born in the 1940s and 1950s” (Chetty et al. 13).
The ethical appeal can be highlighted through the introduction of statistical figures which are used for a more detailed and understandable explanation of the information presented in the paper for the audience and the proof of logical grounds arguments ((Davoudi et al. 24; Mohamad 2). This article differs because it has no emotional appeal since this aspect is not typical for scientific papers.
Mode and Media
The article by Tankersley was published by the Washington Post. It is digital and can be accessed through the link without an additional subscription to the newspaper’s website. Both articles under discussion present texts, graphic representations, and video evidence. The distinctive feature of the article by Chetty et al. is that it is available on various media platforms, such as the National Bureau of Economic Research, Science publications, and the Stanford Center on Poverty and Inequality.
Genre Elements, Design, and Style
In both articles, the information is well organized in paragraphs, contributing to a better understanding of the main points. Nonetheless, Chetty et al.’s article has the advantage of being segmented into sections for easier information navigation. In addition, it has keywords to show basic information about the discussion graph, headings, and captions. Enabled the reader to access their external contact and provided a link at the end of the article. The text by Tankersley uses colors to show curves in the graphs and provides external links for more information and research.
Regarding the style and design, the authors of both works use a rather formal and solemn tone of narration. A distinctive feature of the work by Chetty et al. is that there is a greater emphasis on persuasion, and the language is more focused on educating the audience. The authors cited works with experimental methodologies and used statistical figures. On the other hand, the article by Tankersley has a more dignified tone, but Chetty et al. have convincing language. Both papers effectively use words and visuals to present the information to the audience. The article by Chetty et al. has a more restrained design, and the work by Tankersley is more colorful and attractive.
Sources
The authors use evidence-based research papers to support their ideas. Tankersley used works by Raj Chetty and other scientists and often supported his reasoning with them. Chetty et al. firmly attributed their work to other sources and used footnotes to refer to a specific work. Moreover, both research papers provide hyperlinks, which lead to other sources to delve into the topic. In both articles, readers can verify the sources or find more information about the topic using hyperlinks.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the analysis of research papers by Tankersley and Chetty et al. provided valuable insight into how the works published in popular and scientific sources differ. The main difference is the use of language and rhetorical appeal. Hence, in a scientific article by Chetty et al., a more formal, restrained, and straight-to-the-point language and scientific terminology are used, and there is an emotional appeal. On the other hand, Tankersley uses more straightforward vocabulary and all three types of rhetorical appeal.
Works Cited
Chetty, Raj, et al. “The Fading American Dream: Trends in Absolute Income Mobility Since 1940,” Science, vol. 356, no. 6336, 2017, pp. 398-406.
Davoudi, Simin, et al. “Reinventing Planning and Planners: Ideological Decontestations and Rhetorical Appeals.” Planning Theory, vol. 19, no. 1, 2020, pp. 17-37.
Mohamad, Hairul Azhar. “Analysis of Rhetorical Appeals to Logos, Ethos and Pathos in ENL and ESL Research Abstracts.” Malaysian Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities (MJSSH), vol. 7, no. 3, 2022.
Tankersley, Jim. “American Dream Collapsing for Young Adults, Study Says, as Odds Plunge that Children Will Earn More than their Parents,” The Washington Post. 2016. Web.
Loading...
