Lilia Wong

Ms. Whitney

AP Language and Composition

March 10, 2020

Nicholas Kristof: The People’s Scholar

Heeding from Yamhill, Oregon, Nicholas Kristof knows a thing or two about the average

American experience -- far away from the corrupted swamp of Washington. Kristof’s

neverending purpose is to remind the readers of the New York Times how those on the other side

live, and why the government is to blame. He employs imagery, lists, and studies in all of his

articles: A perfect formula to make the white, educated American New York Times reader feel

that change should be enacted, and hopefully convince a stray lawmaker reading his column

along the way.

Kristof’s precept is unilateral: Leaders in power need to be held accountable for the

impact they have on everyday people. He applies this concept both internationally and

domestically. Kristof references issues such as the Venzulean and American healthcare crisis, the

opioid epidemic, and misleading far-right branches of media. He usually addresses these as

systematic problems, put in place by a government. Occasionally, he even offers ways to fix this,

but is more likely to merely underscore the issue.

Kristof uses a blunt, critical tone in many of his columns. He rarely possesses sympathy

for the government’s leaders who fail to help the average American through crises. In “Fox

News? More Like Trump’s Impeachment Shield” Kristof blamed Roger Ailes, a former Nixon

aide, for propagating the Swine flu. Kristof also avoids flowery language. This is critical to his

appeal; his audience of educated New York Times readers and lawmakers do not want to feel as
 Wong | 2

though there is wool being pulled over their eyes. Kristof will tell it to them as it is, even if he

blames them throughout for inaction.

Kristof employs many rhetorical devices through his columns, a reader will not be hard-

pressed to find imagery, lists, and studies throughout his work. A hard hitting Kristof article will

start with a detailed imagery of an impoverished citizen suffering at the hand of the government.

In “Venezuela's Kids are Dying. Are We Responsible?” Kristof vividly depicts a mother who

lost her infant because of the ineffective healthcare system in Venezuela, depicting details such

as the baby’s cold temperature when she died; the specific anecdotes transport the reader from

the comfort of their coffee table to the scene. The usage of imagery places Kristof’s privileged

audience in the mindset of a poor and/or oppressed citizen who has little control over his or her

situation. The process masterfully creates pathos. Kristof pulls on his reader’s heartstrings and

forces them to feel empathy for the impoverished individual he describes.

After imposing pathos on his readers, Kristof will hit them with a list. The list will

typically give readers the full extent of an issue, and will pile on an immense amount of

information in order to convince his readers that an issue is real and egregious. In “Don’t Let

Trump Make You Numb to What’s Unacceptable” Kristof lists all of Trump’s past unfortunate

actions, such as viewing undressing teenagers in changing rooms and using Stalin-like language,

to remind readers just how morally corrupt the President is. The breadth of the information

further corroborates his points, because of the overwhelming amount of information supporting

it. Lists play well to New York Times readers and lawmakers alike. There is often an inability to

argue against Kristof because he places so many arguments and facts supporting his point in a

list.
 Wong | 3

Kristof will then include studies, and appeal to reader’s logos. In “Our Children Deserve

Better,” Kristof rattles off many facts, such as the ever increasing American teen sucide rate. The

usage of studies makes Kristof’s argument more credible, as there are facts and figures to back it

up. Studies make it more difficult for people to label him as a liberal columnist whose beliefs are

unfounded. It also appeals to the educated readers of the New York Times and lawmakers, who

know that they’re educated enough to pick out the validity of facts and figures.

Kristof’s audience is the readers of the New York Times and lawmakers. The New York

Times audience believes in many of the liberal programs he advocates for, such as furthering the

social safety net. He often will directly address “the people in power,” (who are usually

Republican lawmakers who fail to advocate for welfare programs), naming the items that they

could achieve instead of aiding the disease of corruption. But first and foremost, he addresses the

readers of the New York Times. The readers are often both privileged and educated. They keep

up with the news and his columns. Kristof knows exactly how to play to their experience through

pathos via imagery, lists, diction, and logos by studies.

Kristof uniquely relates to many aspects of his articles. He is quite accomplished: A

Rhodes scholar, a Pulitzer Prize winner. Yet he grew up in Yamhill, Oregon, a quaint rural town

which has been devastated by the opioid crisis. These life experiences give him a rare

perspective. He is educated enough to relate to the readers of the New York Times and

lawmakers. Kristof knows how to play to their sense of education and privilege, and his own

education and prestige tells him how the government could play a greater role in average

citizen’s lives. He can understand the implication of the stock market and politics on everyone.

Yet his humble upbringing grants him a keen sense as to what issues need to be covered, and

how average people are affected. While Kristof still travels and researches about the
 Wong | 4

impoverished (and needs to) he knows what being a “nobody” citizen is about, and takes the

burden on proudly.