Samantha Retrosi Argument Analysis

In today’s world, the communication of information is incredibly important. A great use of communication is when people talk about their experiences. Often times when people feel they have faced cruelty they speak out. Samantha Retrosi, an Olympic athlete, felt like she had faced cruelty and wrote an article talking about her experiences. However, Samantha Retrosi’s argument in “The Cruelty of the Olympics” is not compelling because it is heavily biased, it is exaggerated, and it is off topic. The bias placed on the Olympic games in “The Cruelty of the Olympics” contributes to the argument being unconvincing. In this argument, there is tons of bias which may have been caused by this negative experience, “But, I did get sucked into the

One example of the exaggeration used in “The Cruelty of the Olympics” is “I can tell you from experience that the Olympic Games have much more in common with the Hunger Games than anyone would like to admit” (Retrosi 1). For those who are wondering, the Hunger Games were an event in which kids aged from twelve to seventeen were unwillingly put into an arena to fight to the death. Which is quite different from the Olympic Games, where athletes are asked to compete in organized sporting events to gain international fame and glory. Retrosi also states, “All of my clothing was plastered with the Verizon logo” (3). The fact that she states this as if it were cruelty is astonishing because in essence all she was asked to do is wear the logo of the company that paid for her training so that she could achieve her athletic goals. In the article Retrosi speaks out against the opening ceremonies, “The carefully orchestrated pageantry is misleading, telling us that the Olympics are a celebration of the human capacity to achieve, to overcome obstacles and that the world’s best athletes represent something bigger than themselves” (1). Clearly, Samantha Retrosi must have forgotten about the great Olympians like Katie Ledecky, Usain Bolt, and Sidney Crosby who all inspire millions worldwide to overcome adversity and push themselves during the Olympic

In the article, it states, “At the London Games, the cost of the opening ceremonies alone was a whopping 42.3 billion” (Retrosi 2). This information is interesting but completely irrelevant to discovering cruelty in the Olympics. In this article, the complications of funding are also discussed, “America’s best athletes are almost entirely dependent on corporate sponsorships. For the athletes, the consequences of this addiction can be disastrous” (Retrosi 3). This statement shows off problems for athletes in the US, but still doesn’t detail any cruelty from the Olympics, because the Olympics has no control over how countries handle their athletes. Samantha Retrosi also mentions the US Army World Class Athletes Program, “ Today’s luge athletes have had to look elsewhere for support, with many having little choice but to join the US Army World Class Athletes Program … Apparently, one must be willing to enlist- and possibly fight and die for one’s country- in order to cover the expenses of international competition” (Retrosi 3). Once again, Samantha Retrosi’s statement has little to do with the Olympic Games and more to do with the way America handles its athletes. Therefore, Samantha Retrosi’s argument is significantly lacking because of the abundance of irrelevant information.

Samantha Retrosi’s argument in “The Cruelty of the Olympics” is not compelling. Obviously, the bias