An “A voice of Hate in America’s

An
article released in the New York Times is getting a lot of negative feedback.
The Article is called “A voice of Hate in America’s Heartland” and is written
by Richard Fausset. The article is about a man named Tony Hovater who is known
to be a Nazi sympathizer and white supremacists. Fausset acts as if Hovater is
a normal person just like you and me, which really gets the mind thinking what
is the purpose of this article, to begin with? What is the author trying to
accomplish with this article? This article has a lot of problems and should not
have been written, which we will be looking at here shortly. (Thesis)

There have been some extreme criticism towards a man
named Richard Fausset about an article he recently for the New York Times. Fausset
grew up in New Orleans and has a degree in English and a degree in journalism.
Fausset is a writer based in Atlanta. He mainly writes about culture, politics,
race, poverty, and criminal justice (ny times fausset).  Fausset wrote an article called “A Voice of
Hate in America’s Heartland” in the New York Times.” The article talks about
Tony Hovater and his beliefs which were very extreme. Hovater is in support and
apart of white supremacist groups. Fausset wrote in the article “Most Americans
would be disgusted and baffled by his casually approving remarks about Hitler,
disdain for democracy and belief that the races are better off separate.” Now,
this is just one example of Fausset being criticized. Fausset has never been
criticized this much for writing an article before until he wrote about “A
Voice of Hate in America’s Heartland.”   

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!


order now

The author is now taking fire for the newly released
article in the New York Times. Fausset credibility is now being taken into
question after writing about “A Voice of Hate in America’s Heartland.” Fausset
has written many articles in his time but has never received so much negative
criticism before. He has the credentials to write any kind of article. “He has
covered the Charleston S.C., church massacre in 2015 and wrote extensively
about working-class voters in the run-up to the 2016 presidential elections
(The NY Times).” So he’s written some very important and touchy subject before
but manage to focus on a purpose in those. Richard Fausset meets all the
credentials to write the article “A Voice of Hate in America’s Heartland” but
needs to realize it’s a more sensitive topic than most. The author failed to
meet the needs of that article, which ultimately made it a very bad article.

The audience is very clear in the article. It appeals
to most white supremacist. The article does not appeal or interest many people
at all. Most people have actually read the article but it not because it is
appealing and interesting. Many people have read it and are angered by the
statements in the article. For example “He is the Nazi sympathizer next door,
polite and low-key at a time the old boundaries of accepted political activity
can seem alarmingly in flux ().” This is just one of many statements that
angered most people. Fausset abstains very few people that would be interested
in this article. This is because it does not grab the intended audience it
angers them to read it. The author did not do a very good job of getting people
interested, which will ultimately make it ineffective as an article.

An article written by Richard Fausset does not have
any purpose at all. If you have no purpose then there is no purpose in writing
the article to begin with. The author had already felt there was a hole in the
heart of his story. People have asked the purpose in this article, which
eventually leads to Fausset making a follow-up article to find the missing
pieces to the story he was looking for. He never really found this piece to
fill in the article. If the author would fill that hole in the article by
giving it a purpose it would make the article better and maybe even
understandable. With this piece of information gone, it makes the article have
no purpose and no reason for the author to write the article making this look
very bad on the author.  

            “A Voice of Hate in America’s Heartland” should not
have been published due to the flaws the author could have prevented. The
author has all the credentials to write this article but fails miserably. He is
one of the best New York Time writers (). Fausset only focused in on a very
small amount of people that the article will be of interest to. This means the
article is not all that appealing and interesting to most people. He did not
have a purpose for writing this article, which left people wondering the
purpose and questioning him. Overall this is a very poor article and Fausset
could have done a better job writing this article. What do you think about this
article and why?