Focusing specifically on McKibben’s descriptive word selection and use, his decision as an author and word variety helps the article to be concise. As well as directing the reader straight to the main point, the pipeline. McKibben chooses words that emotionally connect to all readers, and perhaps to persuade them. Quoting back to paragraph fifteen, McKibben characterizes the Native Americans with such rich word choice that immediately defends the reader's thoughts. “The Native Americans are the only people who have inhabited this continent …show more content…
Starting the article off with more of a demanding demeanor, getting to the point. The first few paragraphs state the gruesome effects from the protests and pipeline along with past massacres. He states, “In the past, it’s almost always ended horribly, and nothing we can do now will erase a history of massacres, stolen land and broken treaties” (McKibben). Setting the dreadful tone at the beginning drags in the reader as they start to get in the right mindset of why is this so horrible. This tone pictures the horrible conditions faced, and the last resort: nothing. Violence is exposed by the stolen and broken events in the past. Continuing throughout the piece, McKibben exhibits the tone from the others, the White House, the Corps, Hillary Clinton, etc. Presenting these aspects sets a formal important political tone. Allowing the read to understand how serious and worldwide this is, through his voice behind each sentence. Consequently, the author demonstrates the economic or environmental tone. As McKibben expressed the water conditions, global warming, and a working climate problem shared by many. This “tree hugger” tone, perhaps evolves to many other societies, in brief, combining readers from all over the world, and different societies, connecting all to the once small