Secondary sources used are from the company reports of Facebook. The company report data from the year 2016 is shared here. The report reflects statistics on the number of senior leaders hired the Black people, the Hispanic’s and women in total. The secondary source used however is not cited as a reference and the author has not added a reference list either. The report can be looked up easily online, but still the lack of referencing reduces the quality of the work. In the case of the western cultural standpoint, looking up Facebook and its annual reports would be an appropriate thing to cross check facts. However, it could so happen that some cultures would be more trusting and could take up statistics on account of it published in the Forbes.
The work of Nazir (2005) is one that the research work makes use of secondary references which are detailed academic references. This form of referencing makes the work more subjective. In any cultural context, the work could still be handled with less bias and hence could be said to be more appropriate for a diverse set of audience as well. Compared to the first source, the second source furthermore is academically inclined in its research subject undertaking. Therefore, it does aim to cater to a wider expanse in audience.
In choosing sources for the sentence task, it was necessary to consider two different sources. Firstly, the source selected had to have real subjective variations. The subjective variations are necessary to identify how the two sources differ in rhetoric and how the sources made use of facts and others. The first source selected was a non-academic article. The article did not follow the conventions used in an academic source; however, the article did make use of rhetoric style that was effective to state its argument. It was observed that more than the academic article, Schmidt (2017) article was more direct in making its point. The source was mainly selected because it was succinct and to the point. It presented the work on cultural-fit, by directly attacking the concept and presenting an argument on why it was not appropriate with a direct quote. On the other hand, the academic work of Nazir (2005) is seen to follow norms and conventions that follow a more subjective setting. While the first source could be read by everybody, people from different cultures will take it with a pinch of salt. They would not trust it completely. Nevertheless, the second academic article in being more subjective and defined within academic norms would be more persuasive content for people of different
The two sources selected were discussed with emphasis on how it would appeal to people of different cultures. It would really be impossible to structure rhetoric that applies to all cultures. However, in following strict conventions like the academic article, the message to be pushed to audiences could be presented in a culture neutral way.