Network as a strategy is regarded by most people around the global community to be the
dominant device that boosts individual career and ignite the growth of business operations.
Network strategy does not emerge in the vacuum, but it takes focused and reflection activity to
create the active and dynamic team in services. Different strategies of networking make network
to be a social commentary but not as a satire. For instance, network as a strategy does not
comprise of the genre of literature together with performing arts in which follies, vices, abuses,
and shortcomings that are the term to be ridicule ideally with the intent of shaming other
individuals, government, corporation, or society itself into improvement. Network as a strategy
helps most individuals and businesses to generate contacts and leads that are essential in assisting
in serving different clients (Davidson 4). Besides, network as a strategy is not a satire because it
does not comprise of a strong irony or sarcasm, although most people can use the network to
exaggerate, compare, and juxtaposition in performing satirical writing and writing (Kleppinger
205). Hence, this research paper investigates if network is a strategy, a satire or social
commentary.
Network as a strategy is social commentary. For instance, the network as a strategy
focuses on different elements that comprise of action, alignment, and connectivity that help in
Surname 2
improving operations of business operators and other individuals. Network as a strategy is a
social commentary as it involves the act of utilizing rhetorical means to offer commentary issues
in the business or society (Davidson 6). However, the networking strategy helps individuals in
creating new business ideas, deepening connections with existing contacts as well as learning
useful data concerning the available markets. Network as a strategy focuses on creating a steady
relationship as social commentary focuses on promoting change and later implementing such
changes by alerting the society of any particular issue and appealing to the sense of justice
among people.
Social commentary
The social commentary refers to the act of utilizing rhetorical means as a way of offering
analysis on different issues within society. Such a review is always done with the idea that
focuses on promoting or implementing change by informing the general community concerning a
specified problem as well as appealing to the sense of justice among individuals. Besides, social
commentary can be practiced through all forms of communication that comprise of printed
communication forms to conversations to digital forms of communication. According to a study
conducted by Bhugra (1334), social commentary refers to the expression of the point of view or
feelings of an individual towards the community, usually through literature work. The writings
of Swift Jonathan together with Luther Martin, are some of the two primary examples of active
along with bitter social commentary. For instance, Swift Jonathan exposed and decried the case
of appalling poverty in Ireland at the moment that was viewed as the fault of the government of
retain (Kleppinger 211). However, Luther Martin criticized instances of corruption within the
Catholic Church, including what presently would be termed pedophilia. Will Rogers alongside
Dickens Charles is some of the examples of social commentators from the lower social strata.
Surname 3
Works Cited
Bhugra, Dinesh. "Commentary: Social Determinants, Social Discrimination, Social Justice, And
Social Responsibility". International Journal Of Epidemiology, vol 46, no. 4, 2017, pp.
1333-1335. Oxford University Press (OUP), doi:10.1093/ije/dyx159.
Davidson, Alistair. "A Research-Based Model Of Social Network Platform Development".
Strategy & Leadership, vol 42, no. 4, 2014, pp. 1-8. Emerald, doi:10.1108/sl-06-2014-
0044.
Kleppinger, Kathryn. "When Parallels Collide: Social Commentary And Satire In French Rap
Before And After Charlie Hebdo". Contemporary French Civilization, vol 41, no. 2,
2016, pp. 197-216. Liverpool University Press, doi:10.3828/cfc.2016.10.