Kristof's Argument In Racism Without Racists?

It has always been a topic of much discussion throughout history: race. Nevertheless, Nicholas Kristof brings a new approach and opinion to an old topic. In this article, his tone, perfect integration of assertion and authority, and the acknowledgement of the opposing perspective ultimately led to a convincing argument.
The usage of an overall positive tone helps contribute to the argument at hand. Often times in today’s media, the news is slugged down by articles with negative connotation. This applies not only to the subject of race, but also to a wider variety of topics. However, “Racism Without Racists” never bashes the opposing side and is respectful throughout the text. A positive attitude entices the reader to be more engaged in their reading but also adds a level of credibility to the author. Even
Whenever a new point was brought up, there was evidence to support it — most of the time with testimonials from respected and educated people. These testimonials raise the author’s credibility, meaning a reader who is more likely to believe what he or she is ingesting. A common mistake many authors make is utilizing a logical fallacy as a point. Kristof did no such thing, always having logical reasoning and superb evidence, resulting in a stronger argument.
Though not directly regarded as a prime example of an argumentative tool, acknowledging the opposing viewpoint in a controversial topic adds persuasion. Kristof gives studies for why Obama was at a disadvantage because of his race during the 2007 election season, but also states that it could be the other way around. “It appeals to some whites as a demonstration of their open-mindedness, and it wins him overwhelming black votes and turnout.” Yet again, more ethos is added to the author. A sign of intelligence and open-mindedness is seeing other views beside one’s one, and that is exactly what Kristof