By depicting people within the Appalachian region as backwards, many groups were able to benefit, none of which included the Appalachian people. In his article, Norman talks about the play “The Kentucky Cycle”, claiming that the backwards fashion in which the author illustrated his characters, and the region as a whole, was performed in a way that promoted cultural superiority. Norman argues that by depicting the region as helpless, people are more inclined to pity Appalachia as a whole. We also see examples of this portrayal in earlier readings such as Frost, as a means to justify exploitation of land and resources through missionary trips. In some ways, everyone benefits from portraying the Appalachian people as “backwards” through resources or cultural superiority; the only people who suffer from this generalization, not surprisingly, are those who live in the region. Cunningham writes that it is not worth discussing the Kentucky Cycle’s cultural inaccuracies and victim blaming tactics, because it is redundant. He instead ponders why Appalachia is the only marginalized culture where sensitivity is not valued or talked about among the liberal media. These kinds of depicts tend to shape the opinions of Appalachia significantly because they are readily accessible, and their relatively recent publication date implies to other that the information is accurate and up to date.