Life On The Global Assembly Line
Essay Preview: Life On The Global Assembly Line
Report this essay
Analysis of Ehrenreich and Fuentes
Ehrenreich and Fuentes “Life on the Global Assembly Line”, World Views, Third Edition, is ineffective because the witness testimony cannot be validated, the use of illustrations is illogical, their examples are based on unfounded information and their statistical data is often not substantiated by scientific data.
Ehrenreich and Fuentes article is ineffective because witness testimony cannot be validated. Often Ehrenreich and Fuentes supply titles but no documentation. They present alleged experts with no names, disconnected assertives and carefully select only biased witnesses.
Ehrenreich and Fuentes quote “a Hewlett-Packard vice-president” who says “They live much differently here than we do” (262). It is obvious that the Hewlett-Packard vice-president remains unidentifiable. Consequently, it is impossible to verify who the vice-president is or where and when his statement was made. Furthermore, the use of the ellipses in the quote, tells the reader there may have been more information contained in that statement and the writers chose only to include the part of the quote that suited their needs.
Ehrenreich and Fuentes continue their biased commentary with the use of statistics that fail to provide back up data to support their claims. The writers state that “A 1970 study of young woman factory workers in Hong Kong found that eighty-eight percent of them were turning more than half their earnings over to their parents” (Ehrenreich and Fuentes 262).
Ehrenreich and Fuentes again fail to provide any documentation to support their statement. Their veiled attempt to use studies fails in more ways than one. Ehrenreich and Fuentes fail to provide any supporting documentation to back their statement. The writers do not cite an agency, or person that performed the study. The writers fail to produce any credible evidence that the study exists. Ehrenreich and Fuentes fail to cite where the study was published, and they fail to tell the reader what, if any was the sample size of the study. The continual absence of producing any reliable or validated documentation weakens their credibility.
Ehrenreich and Fuentes try to steer the reader toward their biased perspective with the use of illustrations that are based on assumptions and not fact. Ehrenreich and Fuentes tell the reader that “there is air conditioning (not for the womens comfort, but to protect the delicate semiconductors parts they work wit), and high-volume piped -in Bee Gees hits (not so much for entertainment, as to prevent talking)” (262). The writers do not or cannot tell the reader where this information comes from. They assume that the only reason air conditioning is supplied and music played, is to protect the