Establishing common ground with your audience

For example, you probably shouldn't start a research paper about the destruction of the Sundarbans mangrove forest with the opening statements, “Forests are inherently valuable to mankind” or “Mankind is destroying the Earth's natural resources.” Both of these statements are too broad to generate much interest and don't really indicate what the paper will be about. Consider instead the opening statement:

“Comprising the largest block of mangrove forest globally and accounting for 3% of global mangrove area, the Sundarbans of Eastern India and Bangladesh are biogeographically, ecologically, and culturally unique in their species biodiversity and ecosystem services.”

This statement is specific, interesting, and introduces the topic at hand. However, it's also broad enough to hint at the bigger picture while opening the floor to a more specific problem or insight. While there are a variety of different ways to craft an interesting and relevant opening to your introduction, there are some opening statement types that are generally too broad, obvious, informal, over-used, or boring to be employed in academic writing and, as a result, should be avoided. (However, it's important to remember that the type of opening statement obviously depends on the discipline and type of writing assignment; therefore, rather than strictly adhering to this list, use it as a guide.)

Example 4.2.10. Introduction: Male Suffrage.

In early nineteenth-century America, the market revolution raised questions about the nature of a democratic republic. This political discussion was brought about by the development of an industrial working class, landless, economically dependent, and steadily increasing. While the “majority” within the United States during this time period did not consist solely of economically dependent industrial workers, they were becoming a larger percentage of the majority as the country continued to industrialize—and were beginning to clamor for more representation in the government. This posed a threat to the wealthy, economically independent class of rich landowners, businessmen, and lawyers who had traditionally held government office. Facing increasing numbers of the industrial class, the politically established sought for ways to maintain their political influence. Essentially, the two classes were debating over the answer to the fundamental question regarding which group, the majority or the minority, should have greater access to governmental power. Within the greater context of this dispute, universal male suffrage was a smaller topic that reflected the same tensions revolving around this extremely significant political question. The relationship between the two debates was forged by the underlying theme concerning access to the government; universal male suffrage was a microcosm of the tension between the principle of majoritarianism and the preservation of minority rights concerning their places within the government. This question would significantly shape the political discourse in the United States for much of the nineteenth-century.

Example 4.2.11. Introduction: Immigration Act.

Immigration has been synonymous with the United States of America since the days of the founding fathers. In the ten years following 1980, 668,866 European immigrants moved away from their homes, their families, and their jobs to craft new lives in the United States. During the presidency of Lyndon B. Johnson, the Immigration Act of 1965 removed the discriminatory quota system from United States immigration laws. The quota system was undesirable for a variety of reasons. One key cause at the core of the quest to change this system was that it allowed only a specific proportion of immigrants into the country. This proportion was representative not of the populace of the country in 1965, but of what America had looked like after the census of 1920. To put this into perspective, the number of immigrants allowed into the country from Western Europe was vastly greater than the number of immigrants allowed into the country from Asia and Eastern Europe, leading some to believe that racial stereotyping played some part in immigration.

The Immigration Act placed a cap on the number of immigrants entering the United States from the Eastern or Western Hemispheres, and further divided that cap by placing a limit of 20,000 immigrants per annum from any country. The majority of people immigrating to America from Europe at this time were members of the working class. Among them was my dad. The Immigration Act was designed to make the process of immigration to the United States more fair and less biased toward people of European descent, who seemed “less foreign.” The Immigration Act of 1965 effectively restructured the United States' immigration policies in such a way that no group, minority or majority, was singled out by being discriminated against or given preferential treatment in terms of their ability to immigrate to America.

What does it mean to establish common ground with your audience?

Why is it important to establish common ground with your audience be specific?

How can you demonstrate common ground with an audience?

Why is establishing common ground with readers important to connecting with your audience especially in academic writing?