Sarah Kells Editorial Feb 19

Why We Need Women in War Zone by Kim Barker

This editorial was written in first person, which caused it to have a very strong and persuasive tone.  If it had been written in third person, it would be less personal and would have seemed to me like it were not nearly as trustworthy.  About halfway through the paper, though, it changed into being written about someone else, Lara Logan.  This did not make the editorial any less persuasive, though.  The first part was to prove that the author knew first hand what she was writing about, and the second part proved that she was not the only one.
Barker's voice in this column is made my not only her use of first and third person, but also by how she phrased questions and statements that the readers might be thinking such as "Why take the risk?" and "because she’s pretty; because she decided to go into the crowd; because she’s a war junkie."  Her diction also helps her voice, because it is very confident, but not terribly fancy or confusing.  It is everday diction ("predictably," "dismissed," and "important") but this kind of diction makes the column seem to be something for anybody to read, not just people with a large vocabulary or people who are big readers.
Barker also uses syntax to emphasize her point.  She says "The men kept grabbing.  I kept punching." using short sentences to make her point clear and to make the reader feel like this is a repeated process.  These kind of techniques were very helpful in her voice and in making the reader sympathize with the point she is trying to make.
This article would not make an appropriate AP essay because the beginning of it is written in first person.  If it were edited to be in third person, however, I believe that it would make a very strong essay.