Russell Johnston 1234 UNC Charlotte Street Charlotte, NC September 12, 2013 To: The American Cancer Society

Management Dear, Upper Management: I am writing to you now to call into question several business tactics, which I find concerning. After my grandmother was diagnosed with cancer 20 years ago, my family has donated money to the American Cancer Society every year. It concerns me that their money may go to a charity that does not allocate funds appropriately. However, what is more alarming is the fact that millions of people who donate to your charity every year expect to help researchers cure cancer, which apparently is not true. Recent yearly revenue reports show that the ACS (American Cancer Society) CEO receives a 1.8 million dollar salary annually. More importantly however, is the fact that only 7% of the ACS earnings go to actual research. Figures like these seem to suggest that your organization is concerned with overhead costs and employee compensation, rather than directly supporting a cure for cancer. In fact, it seems that your campaign to increase public awareness of cancer is under-funded as well. For every $7.82 spent on overhead costs and salaries for your employees, only 1$ goes to actual research or awareness programs. Nationally, only 13 percent of your total revenue goes to directly supporting cancer. With a reported 1 billion dollar cash reserve, your charity is now the wealthiest non-profit in the United States. Despite this vast wealth, you continue to run a marketing campaign, which claims that donations are needed to keep your cause alive. You have created the mindset that the ACS is in desperate need of money. The Chronicle of Philanthropy reported that your charity was "more interested in accumulating wealth than in saving lives." (IRS) As someone whose family has been affected by cancer, it bothers me that a charity like yours would not spend money where it could be effective. I hope that the American Cancer Society will reassess where they allocate their funds and the rhetoric you use to obtain them. As for my family, I cannot support the American Cancer Society currently, when my donations could be more effective when donated directly to a research lab. From, Russell Johnston

Works Cited
"Return of Organization Exempt from Income Tax."Guidestar. Internal Revenue Service, n.d. Web. 12 Sep 2013. <http://www.guidestar.org/FinDocuments//2009/131/788/2009131788491-06638161-9.pdf>.

Analysis

The mood I attempted to project was simple and reasoned. With ample use of statistics, I hoped that the American Cancer Society would view me, the writer, as legitimate. I also used statistics to display that my claim was legitimate. Using IRS forms as a source also helped establish credibility. Using these techniques I hoped to display some variation of Ethos rhetoric.

Referring back to a personal issue (my family and history with the disease), allowed the ACS to have some sort of sympathy toward my situation. Furthermore, I finished the letter with the statement of my family withdrawing financial support for the ACS. I felt this was the most important sentence because ultimately this is what the charity wants. Without my support (and the rest of the public), they cannot raise funds to pay their budget. I was careful to word it so the ACS has a way to rectify the situation. I stated that if they could somehow allocate funds toward research and public awareness of cancer, then I could consider moving my donations back to the ACS. Pathos is used to create a mood of empathy toward my familys situation, while Logos is used to show why my money will not be donated to their charity. The hope is they will view my situation as a problem that is systemic.

Ultimately my donations mean nothing to this massive charity. However, I can hope that they see my complaint as one that is shared within the community. If the public views the ACS as a charity that is misusing their donations, then the public will stop donating to the ACS. Consequently, the American Cancer Society will change their budget policies, and fight to earn my families donation money. Once again, using a logical stance.

Lastly, I choose to address this letter to the upper management of the ACS. I felt like that group was the most appropriate to address simply because they have the power to influence change within the charity. If I had addressed this simply to a middle manager, I would hardly see systematic change to budget policies. Because I addressed this to upper management, I used a much more reasoned and slightly emotionally detached rhetoric. I wanted my argument to come across and reasoned and analytical for the purpose of credibility and respect.