A Crimson Stain

 The Slate article "There is No Harvard Cheating Scandal," by Farhad Manjoo, in wordle form.  Click here to read the article.

This past Friday, sixty students were forced to “withdraw” from Harvard because of allegations that they cheated on the University’s “Introduction to Congress” final last spring.  When news broke of the scandal this September, many people were astonished at the potential ways in which this could tarnish the university’s reputation.  In contrast to typical negative reactions, Farhad Manjoo, Slate’s technology columnist, spoke up in defense of the accused students.  Manjoo’s argument rests on the major premise that once in the “real world,” collaboration will be vital to the success of these students; thus, it did not make sense to forbid them from working together, especially on an open note exam when they were allowed to consult the Internet.  By structuring the article around this central claim, Manjoo effectively lays out his argument, further enhancing it through skillful usage of rhetorical elements.

At various points in the article, Manjoo uses rhetorical questioning to transition between aspects of the argument.  In the beginning, after establishing the facts for his audience, Manjoo asks the question, “What’s the point of prohibiting students from working together?”  A bridge between fact and opinion is thus created, allowing Manjoo to bring his own thoughts into the article as well as create flow.  The third person perspective from which the argument is narrated strengthens it.  Impressively, Manjoo never once says the word “I” throughout the piece.  His omission of this word lends credibility and sophistication to the article and helps to reinforce his focus on the students, as he leaves himself out of the piece.  The wide variety of quotes Manjoo weaves into the article also contributes to its effectiveness.  By incorporating quotes of questions from the “Introduction to Congress” exam, as well as one from Steve Jobs about the way Pixar’s office is set up to foster creativity, Manjoo enhances the argument by backing it up with external evidence to validate his claims.  The range of quotes shows the effort Manjoo put into the argument and allows him to appeal to a wide range of audience members, in particular American students around college age and teachers, both of whom are familiar with rigorous testing.

Therefore, I think Manjoo successfully uses his argument to fulfill his purpose.  In his attempt to exonerate the accused students, Manjoo employs many persuasive devices that work to convince the audience of a surprising yet compelling point.