I read an article this week on the New York Times website about the steadiness of Mexican New Yorkers in the workplace. Aside from my initial thoughts about the topic, going into the piece, I had to say right off the bat that Kirk Semple, the writer of the article, did a pretty good job with the lede. Not only is it a straight to the point paragraph, summarizing the key news of the article, but it really painted an image in my mind…and I had to respect that. Because I am always a creative writer at heart first, I value a creative news article lede. Now this isn’t as creative as can be, mind you, but it did enough for me.
The topic of the article, Mexicans success with finding work in New York specifically, was very interesting to me. It’s something that I’ve wondered a lot about, because I know it’s been a steady issue for ages. According to the article, immigrants are more likely to get work than American-born citizens, which was kind of surprising to hear at first, but after I thought about it, made a lot of sense.
According to the article, “Employers love [Mexican workers] because they want to work as many hours as they can,” said Robert C. Smith. Along with that, Mexican workers are willing to work for any sort of pay, and are very compliant. There’s little obligation employers have to them too, because if the workers complain, they risk getting deported. In employers’ eyes, it’s a win-win scenario.
I have to admit that if I were an employer though, I would take into account the fairness of my workplace, and certainly wouldn’t make, “The Mexicans do the hardest work,” as one of the workers stated. Normally, I like to look at the style of which the article is written, but I noticed this time around that it’s interesting to gage how the reporter got all of this information, and how he managed to include the most important facts. I appreciated the amount of research that probably went into getting the facts straight too, because all of his sources were direct people either being affected or affecting someone else.
My final point that I would like to address though is how the piece flowed very well. The important facts were laid up front, at the top and that’s where all of the hard news was found. As the article progressed, I found that it got more personal, including interviews with the workers themselves, and gaining the audience’s emotional support for these workers. There’s definitely something to be said about the topic of this article, because it’s a reality we’re all facing especially within the context of this recession, and yet I can’t help but feel really mixed emotions after I finished reading. I want to say that I feel awful for these workers who come into our country just trying to escape inept work conditions back in their country, but at the same time, I have to admit that I feel for the unemployed of this country who can’t get jobs because they aren’t being given priority. It’s a strange dynamic…and I don’t know if there’s anything necessarily being done to change it.
Find the article here:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/23/nyregion/23mexicans.html?pagewanted=2&_r=1&hp
For additional information and background:
http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/newyorkandregion/series/now_arriving/index.html
Ashley, lots of good stuff here. I particularly like your analysis of how the piece is structured. In fact, I'd say, in the future, focus more on how pieces are put together in addition to your reaction to the content of the piece. Does that make sense?
ReplyDeleteB