The Big Bad Wolf

For some reason my computer was having difficulties and would not let me put my works cited, so I went through and took them out. I apologize that they do not appear, I have them in the hard copy of my rough draft. Also, sorry about all the grammar mistakes, I realize that this is something I need to work on before I turn in my final draft. Thanks! :)

Barbara Ehrenreich, the writer of "Wal-Martian Invasion", uses her article to express how she believes Wal-Mart exhibits a great deal of inequality to their workers. When researching this article, I found that Ms. Ehrenreich is very interested in socio- economic differences, and puts forth a great effort to help those that suffer from inequality throughout America. I also found that she uses this as a career to uphold her comfortable lifestyle. To write this particular article, Barbara Ehrenreich took three weeks and worked as a Wal-Mart employee to see how a person living on Wal-Mart’s wages survives. Due to her interest in socio-economic differences, this article could be considered biased because of the possibility that Ms. Ehrenreich went to work at Wal-Mart in attempts to find something wrong, and for information to write her book. She first published her article in, “The Baltimore Sun,” in which many middle class and Wal-Mart shoppers will receive and view this particular article. Since many of the Baltimore residents use Wal-Mart as their source of groceries, and other home items, this article appeals to them and may cause them to think that Wal-Mart is the “big bad wolf”. Although this article may have been written in attempts to help Wal-Mart employees, it may in fact be more of a hurt than a help to them.
Throughout the article, the author uses words such as Wal-Martian. Although this word may provide comic relief, it is both degrading and hurtful to Wal-Mart. Through this use of diction, the author implies that Wal-Mart is foreign or non-human and is therefore demeaning to employees. This is appealing to a reader because it causes them to believe that Wal-Mart employees are not treated like humans, but rather like an alien or some non-earthly thing. The author fails to realize that through her word choice she is also hurting the employees of Wal-Mart because she tags them to be “rare” or different from the rest of us. Through her diction, it is obvious that the author (perhaps subconsciously) has exhibited an act of inequality herself.
At one point in the article the author describes a Wal-Mart employee as, “ A creature afflicted with the appetite of a starved hyena that does not have time for the niceties.” (Ehrenreich130) This metaphor causes a reader to feel a great deal of pathos for a Wal-Mart employee considering that they are treated like a rodent or animal. This quote is used in context with the story of a female Wal-Mart employee that cannot afford to buy a seven dollar red polo shirt. The author fails to question other reasons as to why this woman may not be able to afford a polo shirt, but rather jumps right to the fact that it is because Wal-Mart treats their workers like animals. She appeals to a reader’s pathos by causing you to feel sympathy for this woman cannot afford a seven dollar red polo shirt, due to her wage of “$7 an hour.” (reference to article) However, I find that her argument is a fallacy. The Wal-Mart webpage states that the average pay for a Wal-Mart employee is $10.83 per hour, and is therefore more than the $7 that Ehrenreich quoted. (Wal-Mart)
Ehrenreich uses a great deal of logos throughout her article as well. She expresses that in the year 2000, Wal-mart was bigger than General Motors, and richer than Switzerland. She also expresses that they churn through almost 600,000 employees a year. (Ehrenreich, 129) Through these statistics the author is trying to appeal to the reader that Wal-Mart is taking over the world and in a way has become out of control. She quotes these facts knowing that there are over 57 Wal-Mart’s in Maryland alone. (Wal-Mart Web page) This therefore will appeal to someone who lives in Baltimore because they will consider how many Wal-Mart’s there are around them and associate that to the large-scale numbers that she is presenting. She fails to realize that these statistics also show Wal-Mart has become one of the biggest economic helps. When a Wal-Mart is placed in a town it provides thousands of jobs for residents and causes the wealth of the town to soar. In Maryland over 17,963 people are employed, and Wal-Mart has paid over eighteen million dollars in taxes to the state of Maryland. (Wal-Mart web page) Wal-Mart is also known for their generous donations and kindness to other people. In 2007, Wal-Mart and Sam’s Cub gave $10.997,401.000 to charities and communities in the state of Maryland and raised $12,198,839.000 to contribute to clubs and other organizations throughout the state of Maryland. (Wal-Mart Website) Overall, Wal-Mart is a great help to the entire community and the state. It can then be said that perhaps Wal-Mart is not taking over the world, but supporting the world. Although, through Ehrenreich’s logos, you would assume that Wal-Mart is selfish and is in fact “taking over the world.”
At one point the author refers to Wal-Mart as, “the worlds largest sweatshop.” This is a very large overstatement and shows just how incorrect she is about Wal-Mart employees. A sweatshop is a place in which workers are paid low wages and work in unhealthy conditions. (Macmillan/Macgraw, 2006) This statement is used as a means to cause the reader to once again believe that Wal-Mart is treating their employees horribly by not paying them enough, and causing them to work in unhealthy conditions, for long hours. Although Wal-Mart offers some of the lowest wages in the market, they are not the lowest and provide jobs for many who otherwise may not be able to attain a job. Many times those who greet you at the doors of Wal-Mart are the elderly, or handicapped who may not be able to find a job elsewhere. Wal-Mart provides careers for all and does its best not to discriminate against those who may not be as fit or able to participate in the work. Overall, to call Wal-Mart a sweatshop is outrageous, and gives readers the false impression that they provide their employees with unbelievably low wages, and cause them to work in an unclean or dangerous environment.
There is a great amount of irony used periodically throughout this article, at one part she states, “ Earth to Wal-Mars, or wherever you come from: Live with us or go back to the mothership.” When the author uses this expression she doesn’t mean that Wal-Mart should literally, “go back to the mothership,” but rather that Wal-Mart needs to learn to set better guidelines for their employees so that they can enjoy a better quality of life. This appeals to the audience because it provides them with a statement that will help them to remember the ideas mentioned throughout the article and cause them to think back and associate future ideas with this article. The author also uses irony when she says talks about Jay Nordlinger and how although he believes that Wal-Mart is a liberal intelligentsia that he favors the expensive store Williams Sonoma. Barbara Ehrenreich included this ironic statement as a comic moment, but also to show the reader that although this man supports Wal-Mart he personally shops at a much higher faluting store and would therefore know nothing about shopping at Wal-Mart. She uses these appeals to show the reader the truthfulness of the story and to help them realize that there is more than meets the eye.
Through the use of Rhetoric in her article, Barbara Ehrenreich, does a great job expressing her opinion to the audience on how Wal-Mart exhibits inequality to their employees, however her opinion is biased. Due to the fact that Ms. Ehrenreich is a scholar of socio-economic differences, it is possible that she went to work at Wal-Mart in an effort to find fault and inequality. Overall, although Ms. Ehrenreich believes she is helping Wal-Mart employees by sharing their story, she may in fact be hurting them by her degrading approach and discouraging the people of Baltimore from shopping there. Ms. Ehrenreich used rhetorical tools to express and appeal her opinion to the audience, but failed to consider the counter arguments and therefore discourages a person from seeing the big picture but rather just her own thoughts. It is my hope that readers will be able to realize that there is more than one side to this argument and that more research should be done on this subject before a side is chosen.