Introduction
The New York Times article titled “America Is Using Up Its Groundwater Like There’s No Tomorrow,” published on 28 August 2023 by Christopher Flavelle, Dionne Searcey, and Mira Rojanasakul, raises an urgent environmental concern about the rapid depletion of groundwater resources across the United States. This essay seeks to critically analyse the article from the perspective of English studies, focusing on its rhetorical strategies and broader implications. By examining the stakes for those affected, the purpose of reading this piece, and the author’s use of pathos, ethos, and logos, the essay will explore how the text constructs its argument and engages its readership. The analysis aims to highlight the intersection of language, narrative, and environmental discourse, demonstrating how journalistic writing can influence public perception and policy debates. Through this examination, key insights into the power of rhetoric in environmental journalism will emerge, alongside a consideration of the limitations of such reporting in addressing systemic issues.
The Stakes for Those Impacted
The stakes outlined in the New York Times article are profoundly high for communities, farmers, and future generations across the United States. The authors vividly describe how groundwater, a critical resource for drinking water and irrigation, is being extracted at an unsustainable rate, particularly in regions like the Midwest and Southwest. For many rural communities, this depletion threatens not only their immediate access to water but also their long-term economic survival. Farmers, who rely heavily on aquifers like the Ogallala, face the risk of losing their livelihoods as water tables drop, rendering irrigation impossible (Flavelle et al., 2023).
Moreover, the article underscores the intergenerational inequity of this crisis. Current over-extraction means that future generations may inherit a landscape devoid of accessible groundwater, effectively compromising their ability to sustain agriculture or live in affected regions. This is particularly poignant in states like Arizona, where unchecked development exacerbates the strain on limited resources. The stakes, therefore, are both immediate and existential, impacting not just individual households but entire ecosystems and regional economies. The language used in the article—terms like “collapse” and “irreversible”—evokes a sense of urgency, compelling readers to consider the human cost of environmental negligence.
The Purpose of Reading This Article
Reading “America Is Using Up Its Groundwater Like There’s No Tomorrow” serves multiple purposes, particularly within the context of environmental awareness and civic responsibility. Primarily, the article functions as a call to action, urging readers to recognise the severity of groundwater depletion and its far-reaching consequences. It aims to bridge the gap between scientific data and public understanding by translating complex hydrological issues into accessible narratives. For instance, personal anecdotes about farmers struggling with dry wells make the issue tangible, fostering empathy and concern among readers who may otherwise remain detached from such technical matters (Flavelle et al., 2023).
Additionally, the article serves an educational purpose by informing the public about a less visible environmental crisis compared to more widely discussed issues like climate change or air pollution. From an English studies perspective, this piece exemplifies how language can shape public discourse on pressing societal challenges. By engaging with this text, readers—particularly students and policymakers—gain insight into the role of journalism in advocating for systemic change. However, a limitation lies in the article’s scope; while it raises awareness, it offers minimal guidance on actionable solutions, potentially leaving readers concerned but uncertain about how to respond. Nevertheless, its purpose as a catalyst for discussion and reflection remains undeniable, encouraging critical thought about humanity’s relationship with natural resources.
Rhetorical Strategies: Pathos, Ethos, and Logos
The authors of the New York Times article employ a combination of pathos, ethos, and logos to construct a compelling argument about groundwater depletion. Pathos, or emotional appeal, is evident in the vivid storytelling that personalises the crisis. Descriptions of families watching their wells run dry and farmers facing financial ruin evoke sympathy and alarm (Flavelle et al., 2023). Such narratives are strategically woven into the text to humanise the data, ensuring that readers connect emotionally with the issue. For example, the mention of generational farms at risk of closure taps into cultural values of heritage and perseverance, amplifying the emotional weight of the crisis.
Ethos, or credibility, is established through the inclusion of expert opinions and authoritative data. The authors reference hydrologists, government reports, and historical records to ground their claims in verifiable evidence. This approach enhances the trustworthiness of the piece, positioning it as a reliable source within a discourse often muddied by misinformation. However, while the article cites experts, it occasionally lacks depth in explaining their methodologies, which may limit its appeal to a more academic audience seeking rigorous analysis. Nonetheless, the use of credible sources reinforces the authors’ legitimacy in addressing this complex issue (Flavelle et al., 2023).
Logos, or logical reasoning, underpins the article’s structure as it presents clear cause-and-effect relationships between over-extraction and environmental degradation. The authors utilise data visualisations—such as maps showing declining aquifer levels—to provide concrete evidence of the problem’s scale. This logical appeal is crucial for persuading readers of the urgency of the situation, though it sometimes risks oversimplification by focusing on dramatic declines without fully addressing counterarguments, such as economic necessities driving groundwater use. Collectively, these rhetorical strategies create a multi-faceted argument that engages readers on emotional, ethical, and intellectual levels, a hallmark of effective environmental journalism (Berger, 2018).
Broader Implications and Limitations
Beyond its immediate rhetorical impact, the New York Times article highlights broader implications for environmental discourse and policy. It underscores the power of language in framing crises, demonstrating how terms like “using up” and “no tomorrow” convey both urgency and inevitability. From an English studies perspective, this choice of diction reveals how media narratives can shape public perception, potentially galvanising support for stricter water management policies (Fairclough, 2003). However, the article’s focus on individual stories and regional issues may obscure systemic drivers, such as corporate agricultural practices or federal policy failures, which are equally critical to address.
Furthermore, while the piece excels in raising awareness, its critical approach to solutions is limited. It identifies key aspects of the problem—overuse and lack of regulation—but offers little evaluation of potential remedies or alternative perspectives, such as sustainable farming techniques. This gap reflects a broader challenge in environmental journalism: balancing alarm with constructive dialogue. Nevertheless, the article remains a valuable text for students of English, as it illustrates how rhetoric can both inform and mobilise audiences on complex issues.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the New York Times article “America Is Using Up Its Groundwater Like There’s No Tomorrow” serves as a powerful piece of environmental journalism that highlights the critical issue of groundwater depletion in the United States. The stakes for affected communities are immense, encompassing economic survival and intergenerational equity, while the purpose of reading this article lies in its capacity to educate and inspire action. Through a blend of pathos, ethos, and logos, the authors construct a compelling narrative that engages readers on multiple levels, though it occasionally falls short in depth and solution-oriented discourse. From an English studies perspective, the text exemplifies the role of language in shaping environmental discourse, demonstrating both the strengths and limitations of journalistic rhetoric. Ultimately, this analysis underscores the need for continued critical engagement with such texts, as they play a pivotal role in fostering public awareness and influencing policy on pressing global challenges like resource sustainability.
References
- Berger, A. A. (2018) Media and Communication Research Methods: An Introduction to Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches. SAGE Publications.
- Fairclough, N. (2003) Analysing Discourse: Textual Analysis for Social Research. Routledge.
- Flavelle, C., Searcey, D., and Rojanasakul, M. (2023) America Is Using Up Its Groundwater Like There’s No Tomorrow. The New York Times.
