I have analyzed the reliability and effectiveness of both articles in persuading the heads of different departments, on how and why the company can be inclusive when it comes to recruitment of women into senior roles. Between the two articles, I believe the article written by Wolfe (2017) is more persuasive based on its reliability and its sources for its claims. Just to give you a more comprehensive analysis, the purpose of both articles is similar in terms of informing and persuading their readers on i) the discrimination women face at a senior position, ii) the competency of women and iii) disregarding gender roles.
Essay due? We'll write it for you!
First article written by Vivien Shiao on November 5th, 2016 for Business Times aimed to provide insights on how women are being treated and discriminated based on gender. Gender-conforming roles – to be warm, likeable, nurturing – have been imposed on women like Hillary Clinton, Adaire Fox-Martin and Lim Chai Leng. These authoritative figures shared their experiences on how they have been reduced, second-guessed and constantly compared to other male comrades. Vivien supported this with the zero-sum game theory where women see few women at the top, hence, conclude that there a few opportunities for women out there. This vicious cycle is thus unbroken. Second article written by Lahle Wolfe on October 30th, 2017 for The Balance Careers included reasons why women should be considered for senior roles due to their parallel expertise to male colleagues. Claims have been supported by other research studies from Gullop, Business Harvard Review and Forbes to appraise the question, “Do Men Make Better Bosses Than Women?”. The article also further supported the idea of disregarding gender completely to focus on one’s proficiency. However, after much evaluation, both articles are different in terms of its reliability of their arguments. After analyzing Shiao’s (2016) article, there was an appeal to authority making it a fallacious argument. She cited the opinions of Hillary Clinton and Adaire Fox-Martin as authoritative. Even though these cited women are relevant to the topic, it is cherry-picked to favor Shiao. It raises questions on credibility of said authority due to the underlying assumption that these women are infallible figures. For example, the repetitive use of Hillary Clinton portrays the overemphasis of a famous individual. It is not to disregard her experience as a woman in high position, but an individual’s reputation or fame should not be used by Shiao to make her reasoning logical. It is thus important to note the difference between an authority and a perceived authority. With such fallacy, it influences the conclusion of reader rather than it being based on evidence and reasoning alone. This makes the argument weak and unreliable to persuade the Heads of Departments.
Wolfe (2017) pointed out a loaded question fallacy in “Do Men Make Better Bosses Than Women?” and continued to unpack it to provide readers with logical reasoning for an unflawed argument. A loaded question is a question that has questionable presupposition. This reflects Wolfe’s ability to evaluate an argument in her own writing. The importance of having logical reasoning in an article is served by logical thinking. This ensures that writer do not just write down their thoughts but evaluate both sides of an argument to come to an informed conclusion. Being able to identify such a fallacy ensures that Wolfe’s writing is persuasive using the best possible evidence with as little flaws as possible.
Every source has an agenda and a purpose in their writing. A subjective writing mostly include a bias stance, and is often encouraged to use when nothing tangible is at stake, for example, in fictitious narratives. Alternatively, objective writing is unbiased and are not tainted by writer’s personal experiences. It also includes verifiable facts.
Shiao (2016) has a subjective tone in the article which causes the article to be slanted. Evidences given in the article is loosely based on anecdotes and unreferenced sources which disallows readers to verify the information. Furthermore, her subjectivity is based on epistemological assumptions that is deceitful. According to Difference Between, a subjective approach is unreliable due to the high probability of facts being colored by writer’s personal bias. Therefore, Shiao’s subjective approach makes her article unreliable and unpersuasive due to the lack of solid, dependable facts.
Wolfe’s (2017) article on the other hand, adopts an objective approach with the inclusion of references and statistics. So, readers like us can verify the facts and draw our own conclusions. She then weaved in statistical findings from Gullop’s poll and incorporated an article from Forbes to support her claim without being speculative. Moreover, articles from Gallup and Forbes are institutions and publication websites of good reputation and quality content. Wolfe did not just simply use statistics for the sake of it. She incorporated credible evidences with information that directly links to her informed assertions on why we should consider women as managers. L: Hence, Wolfe’s objective execution makes her article more fair, believable and reliable.
I hope this comparative analysis have persuaded you on my stance that Wolfe’s (2017) article is a more reliable on to be sent out to the heads of different department. I believe the Heads of other Departments should be able to learn and have all necessary information to come to a decision. It is vital to not take away their power in decision-making and allowing them to make their own judgment. Hence, Wolfe’s article is the most reliable to ensure unbiased information is given to readers.
Disclaimer: This essay has been submitted by a student. This is not an example of the work written by our professional essay writers. You can order our professional work here.
Sorry, copying is not allowed on our website. If you’d like this or any other sample, we’ll happily email it to you.
Your essay sample has been sent.
Want us to write one just for you? We can custom edit this essay into an original, 100% plagiarism free essay.Order now