Instructions:
Write a 6-10 page essay (MLA Formatted) on subject of your choice. It should be in the form of an argument, have a strong thesis, and transition neatly from paragraph to paragraph. Any help is much appreciated!
What's really the Truth? Ralph Nader vs. the Automobile
The story behind Ralph Nader and the safety of cars is a long, complicated, and controversial one. There are many people who feel that Nader was the biggest push for better safety standards, and much fewer who don't believe his arguments were valid. Although there are many convincing points brought across by the lawyer and political activist, there is sufficient evidence to prove that his arguments were invalid, and the proof he used to back up his accusations was fabricated. Ralph Nader's book, Unsafe at Any Speed: The Designed-in Dangers of the American Automobile had a substantial impact on public awareness of the automobile industry's safety standards, and the effects of his labors can be seen today; however, it must be acknowledged that he was a lawyer, not an engineer, and many of his claims were unfounded and some inaccurate.
In everything one does, and every activity he or she takes part in, there is some sort of safety standard or regulation involved in it. From riding in planes to eating cheeseburgers, these standards can be seen everywhere in American life. Especially in car production, strict regulations are followed to maintain consistency in the safety criteria for the production of automobiles. "Car companies around the world have many thoughtful, dedicated engineers focused on safety." says Keith Crain, editor-in-chief of the online newspaper, Automotive News. In most car ads today, the key selling point for cars is no longer based on just their aesthetics or muscle, it is their safety ratings as well. The laws that have been passed since 1966, as well as production and safety criteria improvements have spared thousands of lives, and saved many from severe injuries. "[It] has since saved 600,000 lives. The highway death toll has dropped from roughly 50,000 deaths per year in the 1960s to roughly 30,000 deaths per year today." ("Auto Safety: Past is Prologue") Ralph Nader is known for being a presidential candidate, a lawyer, "The Muckraker", and most importantly, a consumer advocate. He is most well-known for his struggle to make the public aware of and fight for safer, more reliable transport. In 1965, Nader published his most famous, and very controversial book, Unsafe at Any Speed: The Designed-in Dangers of the American Automobile. This book, as well as a few other impactful events started the long debate over the overall security of cars.
Ralph Nader's interests in consumer advocacy started at a young age, when he grew up around talk between customers over politics at his father's bakery and restaurant. "For a dime you got a cup of coffee and a political conversation," Nader said in regards to that restaurant (Nader, 2014). There was lots of talk about the meat plant nearby, and the chemicals the workers were being exposed to. His parents in particular were big influences on his political standing; his father told him when he was a boy that if he did not utilize his rights, that he would lose them. "Nader credits his parents with instilling the basic values and inquisitiveness that sent him on his way." (Public Broadcasting Station)
Nader started his quest for car safety during his education at Harvard, but did not publish anything on the subject until after he graduated, and started his business as a lawyer. In 1959, at the beginning of his political career, after he graduated, Nader wrote an article for the newspaper, The Nation, called "The Safe Car You Can't Buy". This article was focused mostly on how unsafe cars of the 50s were, and what things could be done to improve their quality. He used a few fallacies to emphasize his points, which worked in his favor; in this publication, he used scare tactics to sway the audience into agreeing that cars were very unsafe. For example, in the fourth paragraph, he stated that "The apparently harmless glove-compartment door [had] been known to unlatch under impact and guillotine a child." ("The Safe Car You Can't Buy", 4) This is serious, because putting words such as those is an extremely risky move- any audience member could take them badly and refuse to read any further. However, his tactics succeeded and he continued fighting.
Nader's most well-known, contentious writing was Unsafe at Any Speed: The Designed-in Dangers of the American Automobile. The purpose of his book was to make the public more aware of the cars they were buying, and to "expose" the unsafe characteristics of the many cars on the American market. As with his very first publication on car safety, he used different fallacies to convince the audience that what he was implying was the absolute truth. He used quite a bit of emotional language to attempt to instill a feeling of animosity into his readers: "...the real threat of many lawsuits which must have been anticipated by company lawyers, the absence of any corrective action year after year can only be explained by bureaucratic rigidities and the abject worship of that bitch-goddess, cost reduction" (Nader, Unsafe)
Many of Nader's claims in Unsafe at Any Speed and "The Safe Car You Can't Buy" were unfounded. Furthermore, Ralph Nader was only a lawyer, not a mechanical engineer, or even a mechanic, so some of his allegations were supported by unqualified evidence. For example, in chapter two of Unsafe, he describes "real" cases that involve different kinds of transmission failures, but does not reveal exactly where these cases took place, nor who was involved in them. The way he presents them makes it seem like the examples were just hypothetical situations, and also makes his argument seem less valid. "An automobile is coming out of a parking garage; abruptly it lurches forward and then careens wildly, killing or injuring pedestrians and patrons of a restaurant." (Nader, Unsafe, Ch. 2)
The most widely-debated fight is the lawsuit between Ralph Nader and General Motors. Because this subject is a widely-debated one, there are many opinions, and several misunderstandings. The most common misunderstanding is that Nader caused Chevrolet to stop producing the Corvair, which was the car criticized in the very first chapter of Unsafe. This is untrue, as Chevrolet's Corvair was still a very popular car, even after Nader's book was published. The car was unique, meaning that it cost more money to produce its parts.A big factor that caused Unsafe at Any Speed to become popular across the nation was the way GM behaved after the book was published. Because of the hasty actions taken by GM to investigate Ralph Nader after he published his book, Nader was able to file a lawsuit against the company, and use the money he won to fund his fight. "GM's legal department wanted to know more about [Nader]. It hired a Washington law firm which, in turn, retained a New York detective agency run by a former FBI agent named Vincent Gillen." (Ingrassia) After the dispute between GM and Nader, his book became extremely popular, and the name "Ralph Nader" developed into a household name. GM's actions not only made the company look bad, they made themselves look guilty.
Another very common misconception that the lawsuit between GM and Nader caused was that the Chevrolet Corvair indeed was a very unsafe car to drive. As a result of the dispute in 1966, the government founded the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration in 1970. In 1971, NHTSA revealed that they had tested a few cars Nader criticized (including the 1960 Plymouth Valiant, the 1962 VW Beetle, 1962 Ford Falcon, 1963 Renault Dauphine, and the 1963 and 67 Corvair). In Unsafe at Any Speed, he stated that the 1961-1964 Corvairs had the tendency for the back tires to "tuck-under" as a result of the design of the independent suspension, and cause the car to over-steer, then roll over. In the letters NHTSA sent to all Corvair owners, it explained that the Corvair was not any more or less dangerous to drive than all of the other cars on the road. The only two things dangerous about the car (as with all other cars at the time) were locking the breaks up, and the possibility of carbon monoxide in the heater vents. "The NHTSA concluded that the handling and stability performance of the 1960-63 Corvair does not result in an abnormal potential for loss of control or rollover, and that its handling and stability performance is at least as good as the performance of some contemporary vehicles both foreign and domestic." (NHTSA Report 82-72) Nader argued against the Corvair with a 1960 video of the Ford Falcon and the Chevy Corvair being compared. In the film, the Corvair is shown to have lost control in every attempt to do an "S" turn. NHTSA also reviewed the video and determined that it was a fabricated experiment, thus coming to a conclusion that the drivers used in the video were trained to make the Corvair seem even more unsafe.
Although much of his claims were unfounded, and in some cases incorrect, Nader's impact on the auto-industry can still be seen today; he is also given much credit for improvements since the 60s. The main goal of his research and writings on the security of cars was to make the public more aware of the products they were using. "Whether or not its particular examples were sound, Unsafe at Any Speed mobilized a mass movement, in which ordinary consumers banded together to demand safer cars and better laws." ("This Day in History", 5) Since the publication of Nader's book, automobile safety has been of the utmost importance in the making of the cars, and because of the improved standards, the road is less dangerous. "This industry annually saves thousands of lives that 50 years ago might have been lost." (Crain, 8)
In short, Ralph Nader was not a mechanical engineer, so some of the points he brought across were not entirely correct. In addition to the facts he presented in his argument, he used many misleading notions to influence the audience into believing his accusations, and he used false experiments to try to back up his arguments. On top of that, the unthoughtful actions taken by General Motors to "dig up some dirt" on Nader, and the lawsuit against them that followed just made the company look guilty, and further fueled the animosity toward it. "More than two years after the suit was filed, GM agreed to pay Nader $425,000- the largest out-of-court settlement in the history of privacy law." ("GM & Nader") In conclusion, although Nader's false allegations were unfounded and inaccurate, his writings, and in particular, his book Unsafe at Any Speed: The Designed-in Dangers of the Automobile had an immense impact on public awareness of the safety of cars being driven worldwide.
Works Cited:
Crain, Keith. "50 Years since 'Unsafe at Any Speed'" Automotive News. 27 Apr 2015. Web. 27 May 2015.
Doyle, Jack. "GM & Ralph Nader, 1965-1971," PopHistoryDig.com, March 31, 2013. Web. 27 May 2015.
Morrison, Tim. "Time - Top 100 Most Influential Books: Unsafe at Any Speed". Entertainment.time.com. TIME. 17 Aug 2011. Web. 24 May 2015.
Nader, Ralph. Unsafe At Any Speed: The Designed-in Dangers of the American Automobile. New York. Grossman Publishers. 30 Nov 1965. Print.
Nader, Ralph. "The Safe Car You Can't Buy", the Nation. 11 Apr. 1959. Print.
Nader, Ralph. "Auto Safety: Past is Prologue". Huffingtonpost.com. Huffington Post. 13 May 2015. Web. 28 May 2015.
NHTSA. "Report 82-72", NHTSA Reports. NHTSA. 12 Aug 1972. Print.
"Ralph Nader." PBS. PBS, 20 Nov. 2007. Web. 20 May 2015.
"This Day In History: Unsafe at Any Speed hits bookstores" History.com, The History Channel, 30 Nov 2014. Web.
8 Jun 2015.
Hi, nicolew. I'll tackle a few grammar and style issues at the very beginning of your paper:
___________________________
There are many people who feel that Nader was the biggest push fordriving force for the development of better safety standards, and muchmany fewer who don't believe his arguments (arguments about what?) were valid.
1. I think "driving force" is a more eloquent way to express your thought than "push." I also thought that "development" needed to be added to complete your thoughts.
2. Use "many" when the item you're modifying is something easy to count, like the number of people who don't believe Nader's arguments are valid.
3. Given what comes next, this sentence may be better off rephrased, something like this:Many people feel that Nader was the biggest driving force for the development of better safety standards, although there are some who argue that his arguments about car safety were invalid.I am assuming here that the arguments you refer to are ones relating to car safety. Change it if I'm wrong.
_________________________
Although lawyer and political activists bring upthere are many convincing points (many convincing points about what? You should name what their points are. Are they that Nader's theories about car safety were wrong?)brought across by the lawyer and political activist , there is sufficient evidence to prove that his arguments (you may need to explain what his arguments were about. Were they about car safety?) were invalid, and the proof he used to back up his accusations was fabricated.
I rearranged the first sentence to change it from passive voice (where the subject of the sentence is not the one/thing doing the action) to active voice (where the subject of the sentence is the one doing the action. This is almost always preferable in writing.
_______________________
Ralph Nader's book, Unsafe at Any Speed: The Designed-in Dangers of the American Automobile had a substantial impact on thepublicpublic's awareness of the automobile industry's safety standards, and the effects of his labors can be seen today ;.however, it It must be acknowledged, however, that he was a lawyer , notrather than an engineer ,;and many of his claims were unfounded and some were inaccurate.
1. Be sure to italicize or underline book titles.
2. Public needs to be possessive, so I added a " 's " to it for you. I also preceded it with a "the."
3. The end of your sentence was too long, so I divided it into two sentences and broke up the second one with a semicolon. I think this groups your thoughts in a more logical way.
_____________________
I haven't read your whole pager, so maybe you get to this later, but you've making some pretty bold claims about Nader's book that I feel need references. It's one thing to say, "Some people argue that his research was invalid," etc., but it's another to assert it as strongly as you're doing. Just make sure that you can back up your assertions of wrongdoing with solid references. It's not good to strongly accuse someone of fabricating data, etc. without evidence.
