English Composition II- Summary and Response Essay

Malinowski 1

Stephanie Malinowski

Professor X

English 1302.CY1

7 October 2012

Questioning Thomas L. Friedman’s Optimism in “Thirty Little Turtles”

You are struggling to fix a problem that arises when you are downloading new computer

software onto your computer. You’re about to give up on the whole thing when an idea hits you:

call the software company itself to ask for assistance. Should you be surprised when the person

who answers the phone to help you is based in India? Should Americans support or question

outsourcing?

In “Thirty Little Turtles,” an op-ed piece that appeared in the New York Times on

February 29, 2004, journalist and foreign affairs columnist Thomas L. Friedman argues that

outsourcing call center jobs from the Western world to India is transforming the lives of Indian

workers and benefiting geopolitics. Friedman supports his argument by detailing his experience

visiting a call center in India. He claims that the Indians working to serve Canadian and

American markets are happy with how their work has improved their lives. Friedman points out

that the working Indian women feel liberated now that they are making a decent wage and can

afford such things as a college education. He describes Indian workers’ view of their jobs, using

words such as “self-confidence” and “independence.” At the end of his article, Friedman states

that he doesn’t favor Indian employment over American employment but that outsourced jobs in

countries like India or Pakistan create both prosperity and global security. Although Friedman’s

article clearly conveys to its audience how some Indian workers are benefiting from outsourcing,

his argument relies heavily on personal experience and generalizations. I also think his

Comment [WC1]: An interesting introduction

that grabs the reader’s attention

Comment [WC2]: This is where the author

begins her objective summary of Friedman’s article.

Comment [WC3]: She introduces the work,

giving its title, the author’s name, and when and

where it was originally published.

Comment [WC4]: After the author is introduced

(his full name is given the first time), she refers to

him by last name only.

Comment [WC5]: Note that, in academic

writing, you’ll write about a work using the present

tense, since the author of the work is

communicating to you at the present time.

Malinowski 2

condescending attitude hurts his argument, and he concludes his article too abruptly, leaving

readers with questions.

Friedman succeeds in portraying the positive side of outsourcing to his New York Times’

readers who may be questioning the rationale for outsourcing. Friedman interviews the recipients

of American jobs to see outsourcing from their perspective. Reading Friedman’s article is an

enlightening experience for Americans trying to understand how outsourcing is benefiting

workers in other countries. Friedman’s opening is vivid and captures the readers’ interest by

detailing his experience inside an Indian call center. He quotes the Indian workers expressing the

joys of working for American and Canadian people. These workers testify to the financial and

personal gains these jobs have brought. One woman says that she feels good about her job and

herself “when people come to you with a problem and you can solve it” (qtd. in Friedman 142).

The article is so full of optimism that the reader can’t help but empathize with the Indians and

feel happy that outsourcing has transformed their lives. Through these emotional appeals,

Friedman succeeds in making readers who may have bit reservations about outsourcing think

about the human dimension of outsourcing.

However, Friedman also makes large generalizations based on his few personal

experiences, lessening the credibility of this article. The first sentence of the article reads,

“Indians are so hospitable.” So are all Indians “so hospitable”? Friedman seems to make this

generalization about national character based on the fact that he was applauded by a room full of

Indians after reading a tongue twister paragraph in a perfect Canadian accent. I can see why

Friedman appreciates his warm reception, but “feel good” moments can hardly provide evidence

for the soundness of global economic policies. Friedman generalizes further about what he sees

and hears in the call center room. He talks about the Indian employees in these terms: “All of

Comment [WC6]: This is Malinowski’s thesis. It

can also go at the end of your introduction. Note

that it doesn’t have to be limited to one sentence,

but it’s phrased as a direct response to Friedman’s

article.

Comment [WC7]: She begins with the first issue

addressed in her thesis: how Friedman conveys the

benefits of outsourcing.

Comment [WC8]: Citation for an indirect source

– this is how you cite when using a quotation found

in a source that is not written by that source’s

author.

Comment [WC9]: She moves into the second

issue addressed in her thesis: Friedman’s reliance on

personal experiences and generalizations. Notice

how these topic sentences really sum up the main

ideas of the paragraphs they start.

Malinowski 3

them seem to have gained self-confidence and self-worth” (142). From this single observation,

Friedman makes the assumption that almost every Indian working an outsourcing job must be

gaining, and that the overall experience has done wonders for their lives. However, other articles

that I have read have mentioned that call center work is basically a deadend job and that $200 a

month is not a big salary. Later in his conclusion, Friedman states that “we make not only a more

prosperous world, but a safer world for our own 20-year-olds” (143). Can this conclusion be

drawn from one visit to a call center where Indians expressed gratitude for their outsourcing

work?

An even bigger problem with Friedman’s article is the condescending way in which he

describes the Indian workers. I think he portrays the culture as being incompetent before the

American and Canadian outsourcing jobs came to improve their accents and their lives. One

statement that conveys condescension is this remark: “Watching these incredibly enthusiastic

young Indians preparing for their call center jobs—earnestly trying to soften their t’s and roll

their r’s—is an uplifting experience…” (142). This passage reminds me of the delight and pride

of parents witnessing their children’s growth milestones. Friedman is casting the accent

neutralization of the Indian workers as overcoming a barrier in order to reach success.

Friedman’s condescending tone is apparent again when he restates the words of one American

caller to an Indian worker, “They say you people are really good at what you do. I am glad I

reached an Indian” (qtd. in Friedman 142). I see Friedman’s reason for including this quote; he

wants the reader to know that Indian workers are being valued for their work. However, the

words that the American uses, which Friedman deliberately chooses to include in his article,

“you people,” suggest that Indians are a whole other kind of people different from American

workers in their skills. Friedman’s condescension also appears when he says that these are “low-

Comment [WC10]: I think this information

really needed documentation – an in-text citation

and a works cited entry.

Comment [WC11]: She uses attributive

tags/signal phrases effectively, and it’s always clear

which ideas belong to her and which ones belong to

Friedman.

Comment [WC12]: She moves on to the third

part of her thesis: Friedman’s condescending

attitude.

Malinowski 4

wage, low-prestige jobs” (143). This remark is full of problems because it puts down the Indians

taking the jobs and the Americans who have lost them, and it misrepresents the outsourcing

scene that now includes many highly skilled prestigious jobs.

I also think that Friedman weakens his article by concluding abruptly and introducing

new ideas to readers that leave them with unanswered questions. Friedman asks the reader,

“What am I saying here? That it’s more important for young Indians to have jobs than

Americans?” (143). This point seems like a relevant question to investigate, but its weakness is

that Friedman never even mentions any place in his article the loss that American workers are

experiencing. At the end of the article, readers are left with questions. For example, the last

sentence reads, “we make not only a more prosperous world, but a safer world for our own 20-

year-olds” (143). Although Friedman is implying that outsourcing improves our relationships

with other countries and enhances our national safety, nowhere in the article does he substantiate

this claim. He seems to have thrown this statement into the conclusion just to end the article on a

happy note.

Giving a human face to outsourcing is a good idea; however, Friedman does not support

his main argument well, and this article comes across as a simplistic, unexplored view of

outsourcing. I and other readers are left needing to look for answers to serious questions about

outsourcing elsewhere.

Comment [WC13]: This language is a little

colloquial.

Comment [WC14]: The final point in her thesis

is addressed here.

Comment [WC15]: She ends with a conclusion

that is not just a repetition of her thesis and main

points, but it sums up her essay nicely and answers

her readers’ “So what?” question.

Malinowski 5

Works Cited

Friedman, Thomas L. “Thirty Little Turtles.” New York Times 29 Feb. 2004. Rpt. In The Allyn

and Bacon Guide to Writing. John D. Ramage, John C. Bean, and June Johnson. 5 th

ed.

New York: Longman, 2009. 142-43. Print.

Comment [WC16]: She includes a works cited

entry that gives readers all the publication

information for the article to which she has

responded. You’ll want to include works cited

entries for any other sources you cite in your essay.