The Rhetorical Analysis of "Can This Campus Be Bought?"
The Rhetorical Analysis Essay of “Can This Campus Be Bought”
Jennifer Croissant presents the article, “Can This Campus Be Bought?” in a persuasive way, discussing how the image of a university is affected due to the relationships with large corporations. Croissant provides multiple examples as well as standpoints allowing audiences to view a problem from different perspectives. She points out the reason the corporations are willing to donate money to universities; yet, it is in a form of commercialization on campuses. They are interested in gaining power over the educational institutions, in regards to their popularity and advertisements. On the contrary, the institutions lose the core values, freedom, virtue, and autonomy; strictly speaking, their tendency of being independent has been declined. According to Croissant, this leaves bad images for the schools and they will lose the public and community’s trust and credibility on a large scale. Although she is not against being associated with the commercial activities to stay connected with the outside world, she justifies that there should be a limit in order to prevent the school’s pride, images and capabilities of making decisions. I, as a reader, have a neutral thought in despite of seeing Croissant’s arguments very convincing and helpful because corporate sponsorships also have a big impact in students’ academic lives. Croissant’s article was a wake-up call to students and faculty members to become more aware of the influence of private sectors. She names the University of Arizona “Nike-Pepi U” due to its connections with Pepsi and Nike and states that “because of our increasing involvement with commercial activities, we need to make sure that the university does not betray its educational values and objectives.” It is vital not to lose the school’s core values, mission and freedom where students invest their money and time to gain knowledge and pursue their career goals in the future. Once the school
Jennifer Croissant presents the article, “Can This Campus Be Bought?” in a persuasive way, discussing how the image of a university is affected due to the relationships with large corporations. Croissant provides multiple examples as well as standpoints allowing audiences to view a problem from different perspectives. She points out the reason the corporations are willing to donate money to universities; yet, it is in a form of commercialization on campuses. They are interested in gaining power over the educational institutions, in regards to their popularity and advertisements. On the contrary, the institutions lose the core values, freedom, virtue, and autonomy; strictly speaking, their tendency of being independent has been declined. According to Croissant, this leaves bad images for the schools and they will lose the public and community’s trust and credibility on a large scale. Although she is not against being associated with the commercial activities to stay connected with the outside world, she justifies that there should be a limit in order to prevent the school’s pride, images and capabilities of making decisions. I, as a reader, have a neutral thought in despite of seeing Croissant’s arguments very convincing and helpful because corporate sponsorships also have a big impact in students’ academic lives. Croissant’s article was a wake-up call to students and faculty members to become more aware of the influence of private sectors. She names the University of Arizona “Nike-Pepi U” due to its connections with Pepsi and Nike and states that “because of our increasing involvement with commercial activities, we need to make sure that the university does not betray its educational values and objectives.” It is vital not to lose the school’s core values, mission and freedom where students invest their money and time to gain knowledge and pursue their career goals in the future. Once the school