Columnist Analysis #1: Conor Friedersdorf
Friedersdorf is an incredibly prominent columnist for the Atlantic's political articles. He is strongly opinionated and speaks with somewhat conversational diction. Much of his tone tends to be critical, and occasionally condescending, as in his article titled The Destructiveness of Call-Out Culture on Campus: "No wonder so many students are stressed out by this. And the risk-averse have it especially hard" (Friedersdorf). It is somewhat difficult to pinpoint what Friedersorf values--perhaps it may be the concept of a world free of judgement towards others for what they believe in, based on his perception in the aforementioned article and one in support of the Black Lives Matter movement, titled A New Exhibit in the Case for the Black Lives Matter Movement, where he argues that, "If implemented, the Black Lives Matter policing reform agenda would help to weed out the worst cops, reducing the incidence of brutality ... and YouTube broadcasts of that brutality" (Friedersdorf).
The occasion in which Friedersdorf tends to write articles ranges from political scandals involving Donald Trump to the controversy to gene modification. It seems as though he particularly fancies controversial political and social subjects, the former more abundant, and tends to write whenever either the far left or the far right have done something eyebrow-raising enough to catch his attention.
As a result, it can be concluded that Friedersdorf tends to write for those who align themselves in the very middle of the political spectrum, or choose not to associate with particularly liberal or conservative politics at all, simply neutral. Considering the Atlantic's typical demographic of people in their late 20's to 30's, alongside the fact that many of his articles like The Destructiveness of Call-Out Culture on Campus focus on criticizing college life, it is unlikely that he appeals to a wide range of students, but instead intellectuals who are more settled down in their lives.
Unlike many columnists for the Atlantic, Friedersdorf does not simply write to inform, but instead to point out the flaws in an exceedingly flawed society. It is rare that the subject of his articles is positive; his goal is for the audience to hopefully agree with the invalidity of what he calls out. Many of his articles exemplify picking apart what one group may believe is the right thing to do--with the exception of his articles on police brutality, which tend to align themselves with the beliefs of the Black Lives Matter movement.
The subject of his writing varies between politics, medicine (though that is somewhat of a recent development for him), and ideas about being politically correct or diverse.
His tone, while generally critical and sometimes condescending, may also vary depending on the subject matter; he tends to take on a more serious and less judgemental approach when speaking on racism, but in his political articles he seems to lose that filter somewhat. Some articles like The Destructiveness of Call-Out Culture on Campus may even take a more appeal-to-ethos approach, as they become filled with quotes rather than the usual strongly worded commentary.
The occasion in which Friedersdorf tends to write articles ranges from political scandals involving Donald Trump to the controversy to gene modification. It seems as though he particularly fancies controversial political and social subjects, the former more abundant, and tends to write whenever either the far left or the far right have done something eyebrow-raising enough to catch his attention.
As a result, it can be concluded that Friedersdorf tends to write for those who align themselves in the very middle of the political spectrum, or choose not to associate with particularly liberal or conservative politics at all, simply neutral. Considering the Atlantic's typical demographic of people in their late 20's to 30's, alongside the fact that many of his articles like The Destructiveness of Call-Out Culture on Campus focus on criticizing college life, it is unlikely that he appeals to a wide range of students, but instead intellectuals who are more settled down in their lives.
Unlike many columnists for the Atlantic, Friedersdorf does not simply write to inform, but instead to point out the flaws in an exceedingly flawed society. It is rare that the subject of his articles is positive; his goal is for the audience to hopefully agree with the invalidity of what he calls out. Many of his articles exemplify picking apart what one group may believe is the right thing to do--with the exception of his articles on police brutality, which tend to align themselves with the beliefs of the Black Lives Matter movement.
The subject of his writing varies between politics, medicine (though that is somewhat of a recent development for him), and ideas about being politically correct or diverse.
His tone, while generally critical and sometimes condescending, may also vary depending on the subject matter; he tends to take on a more serious and less judgemental approach when speaking on racism, but in his political articles he seems to lose that filter somewhat. Some articles like The Destructiveness of Call-Out Culture on Campus may even take a more appeal-to-ethos approach, as they become filled with quotes rather than the usual strongly worded commentary.