Capitalism and Human Rights: Genre Analysis of a Political Cartoon and a News Article
Anthony Duong
University of Texas at El Paso
Ever since the founding of the United States in the 18th century people have fought over human rights, whether it be women’s rights, voting rights, ethnic rights, or gay rights. Now in the 21st century citizens have set rights and never have to worry about them right? Wrong. People today are still fighting for their rights. Not only here in the United States, but through out the world. However, the opponent this time is not the people of government, but our economic system of capitalism. People who feel like they work too much and get paid less than the average worker argue with their boss for a raise, or people who demand better working benefits. Others who don't confront their boss form groups to protest. These are ways that some people participate in the fight against capitalism. Some people advocate through different genres of communication to inform other people of the fight for their rights. Genres are different ways of portraying information in an attempt to promote or advocate for a particular group of people. Two of the many genres that are used to inform about the fight against capitalism are Cartoon “How Much Do You Pay Your Boss” by Fred Wright and an article “Capitalism and Human Rights: a case study” from the Oregon State University. They inform people of the battle in hopes of getting more people to advocate for their purpose. In analyzing these genres we can determine how well they present the information and influential the genre is to advocating its purpose.
Purpose and Audience
The purpose of the Fred Wrights “How Much Do You Pay Your Boss” is to express and expose the truth of a capitalistic economy to the people of the U.S. The cartoon features three characters: the factory employee, the employer, and the employer’s companion. It first starts with the employer giving orders to the employee then goes on to the employer and companion speaking. With its humorous cartoon style it shows the audience how company executives overwork their employees but pay them the lowest wage possible to maximize their profits. Providing the information within the dialogue of the two men.
In contrast with the cartoon, the article “Capitalism and Human Rights: a case study” focuses on capitalism outside of the United States. The purpose the article is to inform the audience of how cultures outside of the U.S. are taken over by capitalism and how their rights as people are not even considered. The article gives the example of how the Huaorani people of Ecuador were invaded by capitalism due to the discovery of oil underneath their homeland. The article progressively explains capitalisms effects on other cultures and its power to take over and destroy cultures in the search for profit.
The intended audiences and discourse community for the political cartoon are the working citizens of the United States. Fred Wright’s work was published in company newspapers as well as local newspapers. They were then reprinted and sent worldwide. This distribution brings people outside of the discourse community into the audience. The intended audience may or may not know the issue present in their working environment. In only knowing this we could assume that they would want to know the entire situation especially since the issue involves themselves, as the employees. They would want to know how this capitalistic view on the economy affects their wages and benefits. In obtaining the information the audience may decide to advocate for their rights against capitalism or not.
The audience for the article, however, is smaller localized, and younger due to the fact that it was published in by the Oregon State University Newspaper. The intended audiences for the article are the students attending Oregon State University in Corvallis. Although the article was published in the newspaper it can also be found in the University’s news website. This would broaden the audience to anyone in the city, or anyone who is familiar with the website. Similarly to the audience in for the cartoon, the students may only know that the U.S. has a capitalist economy. Other students may know that capitalism and its effects on the citizens of the U.S but may not know its effects elsewhere. Students with cultural backgrounds may want to know more about the effects of capitalism on different cultures to help prevent its destructive power.
Rhetorical Issues: Ethos, Pathos, and Logos
The information provided by Fred Wright’s political cartoon is short and straight to the point. It focuses on the wage issue within a U.S. factory. Wright establishes his credibility by art style and his constant place in the newspaper. His work takes on serious issues involving labor or human rights and puts a humorous outlook on it. Establishing his style with the audience. By also having his cartoons printed in UE news as well as continuous postings in the newspapers worldwide he establishes his credibility with the audience. His work in labor movements also gives the cartoon an established ethos due to the fact that he has either experience in capitalist jobs or has done research on his own.
The logic of the cartoon is expressed through the dialogue of the two men. The discussion of the relationship between an employer and his employee takes place. The two men then make the specific argument that draws attention to the fact that the employee can only pay the employee because of the work that the employee does. Furthermore, the employer is pushing the employee to work faster and is paying him less then he should. While there are no facts, it sets up the argument through the dialogue in the comic strip.
Along in establishing credibility and giving information, the cartoon also attempts to invoke emotions such as humor, anger, and even motivation. To his style Wright plays a humorous turn on the serious issue of human rights in capitalism. The artistic style gives the employer a pompous, sophisticated look as to where his companion is nonchalant, carefree, and cheerful. Although the art is humorous the information is quite serious. Certain people of the audience may use the information as an eye opener to what is currently happening at their work place, bringing up anger that their employers have been cutting their wages for more profit. Others in the same situation may become motivated to stop and change their current situation.
In contrast to the cartoon the article focuses on the human rights of people outside of the U.S. and the consequences of capitalism invading their lives. The establishes its credibility by presenting a logical problem that the audience can relate to, human rights and capitalism, and gives information that does not contradict purpose of the article. Because the purpose of the article is to inform the audience the author also keeps the information professional and adds little opinion. Inputting opinion would hurt the author’s credibility and defeats the purpose of staying neutral and informative. However, the information is questionable due to the fact that no sources were given or any credible organization to confirm these facts. This lack of evidence to back up the facts hurt the credibility of the article and questions the accuracy of the information.
Although there is a lack of evidence to back up the facts of the article the author logically orders the information to strengthen his argument. He first states the issue of capitalism and cultures and gives the audience an example culture to strengthen his argument. He then states the reason why the culture is exposed to capitalism and how it can destroy the entire culture. He concludes the article with statements such as “The Huaorani culture has been inextricably altered by contact with the capitalist conceptual framework” to further inform the audience of the effects of capitalism, thus enforcing the message of the article (Chavez, 2007). The author uses this logical order of information to make his argument “make sense” to the intended audience despite the lack of factual/statistical evidence.
Similar to the cartoon, the article evokes emotions such as anger, and motivation but in a different way. The article gives facts with strong wording to evoke emotion. An example would be “Most if not all indigenous peoples are threatened with cultural or literal annihilation due to contact with capitalism. The destruction of a culture is like the extinction of a species: it is forever”(Chavez, 2007). The use of words such as annihilation, destruction, and extinction all give off negative connotations. There is a constant use of these words along with the facts that express how cultures can virtually be wiped out because of capitalism can bring the audience to feel anger. At the same time it motivate the audience to advocate for the rights of people outside of the U.S. against capitalism.
Structure
The structure of the political cartoon is based on the dialogue between the employer and his companion. The information is given by the companion exploiting the methods of the company employer through a series of simple questions and answers. This makes it easier to grasp the concept and keep the attention of the audience. However, because it is a political cartoon there are limitations on how the information can be expressed. It does not have the freedom of adding information for better understanding. The information must be short and concise and wording must be easy to understand or the audience will lose interest with the cartoon. The cartoon cannot be too informative because that will contradict the purpose of using a cartoon, which is to entertain the audience while giving minimal, but to the point information. However, there is more freedom on how to express the information because it is a cartoon. The author can express the information in anyway he wants as long as he does. The author uses humorous art to keep the audience engaged with the cartoon and organizes the information so that the audience will understand and grasp the concept more easily.
The structure of the article is based on the information and separated into paragraphs. The information is organized by first stating the crisis of human rights against capitalism then elaborates on it. It gives a background on the culture of the Huaorani. The article continues with the reason why capitalism arrived in their land and explains the effects of capitalism on other cultures. This organization allows the message to be expressed effectively while adding evidence to support the message. Unlike the cartoon, the article allows some freedom to explaining the message. It can give excellent evidence and also can give more information as opposed to a cartoon or a poster. This would allow the reader to better understand the point being given and also allow the audience to a better chance to advocate for or against the given issue. There are limitations however, on how the message can be conveyed. The addition of information would require the reader to put more time into reading the article. This also means it takes a longer time for the message to be conveyed.
Style/Language
The language of the cartoon is very informal. It is this way because it allows the audience to connect to the concept more easily. It also allows the audience to read through the entire cartoon without feeling the awkwardness of formal language. In addition, the style of the cartoon furthers the audience’s interest in the cartoon by having the characters posed in a comedic and iconic way. The employer stands confidently and talks in an egotistical way. His features show his position in the company. The large cigar in one hand the clipboard in the other while the other character is somewhat comedic in his stances and words. Specialized language would include words that involve capitalism and the employee’s wages. These would include: pay, work, and product.
In contrast to the cartoon the language of the article is very formal, stating a thesis and then elaborating giving supporting evidence on the topic. Though very formal powerful words are used to express the damages of capitalism on cultures and human rights. Specialized language would include words that pertain to the culture and capitalism. These would include threatened, cultural, annihilation, capitalism, traditional ways, and economic system. Due to the formal language and informative style of the article, the audience has a little chance to get personally involved with the information.
Conclusion
Overall, both genres effectively portrayed information on the effects of capitalism on human rights. One genre exposes the reality behind factory executives and their employees and the other exhibits the destructive effects of capitalism on cultures outside the U.S. However, because “How Much Do You Pay Your Boss” is a cartoon it can effectively portray its message in a short amount of time while entertaining the audience. The humorous style the author brings keeps the audience’s attention and supports the serious issue of wages. The short concise information within the cartoon makes it easier to grasp the message portrayed. In contrast, the article “Capitalism and Human Rights: a case study” requires a longer time frame in which the audience can fully understand the message. The article may require more time to read but includes more in depth information to give the audience a better understanding of the issue at hand. The article also has a stronger impact using the rhetorical appeal effecting emotions due to the use of powerful words such as “annihilation.” It is difficult to measure the success of either of the genres, however, the cartoon is better in conveying its message. This is because of the conveniences of the cartoon: short, informative, and entertaining. Overall, how the genre conveys its message to the audience can greatly influence its effectiveness in and success in its purpose.
Resources
Wright, F. (n.d.). How much do you pay your boss?. In Links international journal of socialist renewal. Retrieved February 4, 2011, from http://links.org.au/node/1785
Chavez, R. (n.d.). Capitalism and Human Rights: a case study. In The daily barometer. Retrieved February 4, 2011, from http://media.barometer.orst.edu/media/storage/paper854/news/2007/10/04/Forum/Capitalism.And.Human.Rights.A.Case.Study-3011279.shtml
