COM 205 WEEK 11 DISCUSSION: Politics and Persuasive Speech

Recap

In the previous Discussion of Week 10, we explored how to plan speech communication and described the process we have followed in developing our speech. We also explored why it is vital to plan and prepare the delivery of a speech.

Introduction to COM 205 Week 11 Discussion

This How-To Owlisdom Guide will help you critically analyse campaign speeches from various politicians to determine their effectiveness in persuading voters. You will recall or research speeches you have heard online, evaluate their persuasive elements and compare them to the characteristics of successful persuasive speeches outlined in your readings.

Recall some of the campaign speeches you may have heard in the past (or look online for different campaign speeches from various candidates)

Recall and Select Campaign Speeches

To start the COM 205 Week 11 Discussion: Politics and Persuasive Speech, we will recall and explain some of the campaign speeches we may have heard before.

• Start by recalling any campaign speeches you have listened to in the past or search online for speeches by various candidates. 
• Choose at least two for a comparative analysis.

Example

I revisited two notable campaign speeches: President Obama’s victory speech (2012) and Senator Elizabeth Warren’s speech in New York (2019). Each speech, delivered in very different contexts and political climates, provided a rich basis for comparative analysis. Obama’s speech, known for its uplifting and unifying rhetoric, and Warren’s, recognised for its focus on policy and reform, offer distinct approaches to campaign oratory.

Are these speeches persuasive? Explain.

Assess the Persuasiveness of the Speeches

Next, we will explain whether the speeches we selected above were persuasive.

• Analyse each speech to determine if it is persuasive. 
• Consider elements such as the clarity of the message, the speaker’s credibility, emotional appeal, and the logical structure of the arguments.

Example

Analysing the persuasiveness of these speeches, several elements stood out:

Clarity of Message – Obama’s speech was clear with his message of hope and change, effectively communicated through a simple yet powerful narrative. Warren’s speech, while more complex, clearly outlined her policy priorities and vision for change, making it accessible to a broad audience.

Speaker’s Credibility – Both speakers established their credibility: Obama through his demeanour and previous achievements, and Warren through her law expertise and detailed policy knowledge.

Emotional Appeal – Emotional appeal was strong in Obama’s speech, resonating with themes of hope and collective effort. Warren’s speech appealed to a sense of urgency and justice concerning social and economic reform.

Logical Structure – Obama’s speech followed a logical structure that highlighted his journey and vision, making it easy to follow. Warren used a problem-solving structure that effectively laid out the issues and her plans to address them.

Based on your readings, how do the speeches agree or disagree with what the text presents as characteristics of successful persuasive speeches?

Compare Speech Characteristics with Textbook Criteria

This section of the COM 205 Week 11 Discussion: Politics and Persuasive Speech explores whether the speeches agree or disagree with the characteristics of a successful persuasive speech.

• Refer to your course materials or textbooks to identify the characteristics of effective persuasive speeches.
• Compare and contrast these academic criteria with the elements used in your analysed speeches. 
• Discuss any discrepancies or alignments.

Example

According to our textbook, effective persuasive speeches should embody clarity, credibility, emotion, and logic—the pillars of persuasion (ethos, pathos, logos). Both speeches aligned well with these criteria:

Ethos (Credibility): Both speakers’ backgrounds and demeanour bolstered their ethos.

Pathos (Emotional Appeal): Each speaker adeptly connects emotionally with their audience through different appeals.

Logos (Logical Structure): Their arguments’ clear and logical flow helped consolidate their messages and facilitate audience understanding.

However, discrepancies arose in the intensity of pathos used. Obama’s speech was more emotionally charged than Warren’s, which focused more on logos with detailed policy discussions. This difference illustrates a strategic use of rhetorical elements tailored to their audience and campaign goals.

In conclusion, both speeches exemplify how different rhetorical strategies can be effectively employed in campaign speeches. The analysis reaffirms the principles outlined in our textbooks and provides a nuanced understanding of how context and audience can influence the strategic deployment of persuasive techniques.

In addition to your original post, be sure to provide a meaningful response to at least two of your peers’ posts by the end of the week. Discuss the persuasive elements described in your peers’ posts in your responses to your peers. Do you agree with their assessments? Why or why not?

Peer Responses

Responding to peers is one of the vital parts of the COM 205 Week 11 Discussion: Politics and Persuasive Speech. We need to provide at least two peer responses. I will provide one example post. You can write your peer responses by keeping the below points in mind.

• Review the persuasive elements they have discussed in their posts.
• Constructively agree or disagree with their assessments. If you disagree, provide reasons and possibly suggest an alternative perspective.
• Keep your responses focused and supportive, aiming to enrich the discussion and understanding of persuasive speech effectiveness.

Response 01

I appreciate your detailed analysis of Obama’s and Warren’s speeches, particularly your breakdown of rhetorical strategies. Your points on their use of ethos and pathos resonate well with what we’ve learned about the pillars of persuasion. However, I wonder if considering the audience’s expectations might also affect the emotional intensity of each speech. For instance, Warren’s focus on policy might have been a strategic choice to cater to an audience seeking substantive plans rather than emotional engagement. It’s an interesting angle to consider how audience expectations shape rhetorical approaches.

Response 02

According to the instructions of the COM 205 Week 11 Discussion: Politics and Persuasive Speech, we are supposed to write two peer responses. I have addressed the given instructions in one response. Following these instructions, you can write your peer responses to the Week 11 Discussion without a hassle.

Closing

Understanding the dynamics of persuasive speeches in political campaigns is crucial for analysing political communication. By comparing real-life speeches to theoretical characteristics, you deepen your understanding of what makes a speech compelling. The COM 205 Week 11 Discussion: Politics and Persuasive Speech enhances your analytical skills and prepares you to be a more informed voter or communicator in political contexts.

Precap

In the upcoming last week of the COM 205 Course, we will discuss the Reflection of the whole course. Based on all that we have learned thus far, we will explore how human communication will evolve in the future.

References

The Guardian. (2012, November 7). Barack Obama’s victory speech – full text. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/nov/07/barack-obama-speech-full-text 

Warren. (2019). Elizabeth Warren Speaks in New York City. https://2020.elizabethwarren.com/nyc-speech