Used thoughtfully, the source materials you have gathered will make your argument more complex and convincing for readers. Sources can play several different roles as you develop your points.
Providing background information or context
You can use facts and statistics to support generalizations or to establish the importance of your topic, as student writer Anna Orlov does in her introduction.
As the Internet has become an integral tool of businesses, company policies on Internet usage have become as common as policies regarding vacation days or sexual harassment. A 2005 study by the American Management Association and ePolicy Institute found that 76% of companies monitor employees’ use of the Web, and the number of companies that block employees’ access to certain Web sites has increased 27% since 2001 (1).
Explaining terms or concepts
If readers are unlikely to be familiar with a word or an idea important to your topic, you must explain it for them. Quoting or paraphrasing a source can help you define terms and concepts in accessible language.
One popular monitoring method is keystroke logging, which is done by means of an undetectable program on employees’ computers. . . . As Lane explains, these programs record every key entered into the computer in hidden directories that can later be accessed or uploaded by supervisors; the programs can even scan for keywords tailored to individual companies (128-29).
Supporting your claims
As you draft your argument, make sure to back up your assertions with facts, examples, and other evidence from your research. (See also 6h.) Orlov, for example, uses an anecdote from one of her sources to support her claim that limiting computer access causes resentment among a company’s staff.
Monitoring online activities can have the unintended effect of making employees resentful. . . .Kesan warns that “prohibiting personal use can seem extremely arbitrary and can seriously harm morale. . . .Imagine a concerned parent who is prohibited from checking on a sick child by a draconian company policy” (315-16). As this analysis indicates, employees can become disgruntled when Internet usage policies are enforced to their full extent.
Lending authority to your argument
Expert opinion can give weight to your argument. (See also 6h.) But don’t rely on experts to make your arguments for you. Construct your argument in your own words and, when appropriate, cite the judgment of an authority in the field to support your position.
Additionally, many experts disagree with employers’ assumption that online monitoring can increase productivity. Employment law attorney Joseph Schmitt argues that, particularly for employees who are paid a salary rather than an hourly wage, “a company shouldn’t care whether employees spend one or 10 hours on the Internet as long as they are getting their jobs done—and provided that they are not accessing inappropriate sites” (qtd. in Verespej).
Anticipating and countering objections
Do not ignore sources that seem contrary to your position or that offer arguments different from your own. Instead, use them to give voice to opposing points of view and to state potential objections to your argument before you counter them (see 6i). Readers often have opposing points of view in mind already, whether or not they agree with you. Anna Orlov, for example, cites conflicting evidence to acknowledge that some readers may feel that unlimited Internet access in the workplace hinders productivity. In doing so, she creates an opportunity to counter that objection and persuade those readers.
On the one hand, computers and Internet access give employees powerful tools to carry out their jobs; on the other hand, the same technology offers constant temptations to avoid work. As a 2005 study by Salary.com and America Online indicates, the Internet ranked as the top choice among employees for ways of wasting time on the job; it beat talking with co-workers—the second most popular method—by a margin of nearly two to one (Frauenheim).