Speak up for Education and Kids

New media has forced political communication to change and adapt.  Now they have the world at their fingertips.  Any candidate, or politically affiliated group, can literally selectively talk to the demographic that they want.  One of the things I find interesting is how involved “3^rd parties” get involved in politics.  In this blog I will discuss the idea of new media in campaigns and how support groups utilize those mass media sites, specifically Facebook.

1.             The group that I have looked into on Facebook is called “Speak up for Education and Kids.”  It is a pretty sizable group with close to 150 thousand likes, and over 2 thousand people currently “talking about it.”  They are actually a tributary of a website called EducationVotes.org, and that group is actually a branch of the parent organization called the National Education Association (NEA).  So, I happened upon their Facebook page, and my findings were pretty interesting.  The first thing you notice is that they are 100% Pro-Obama.  This shouldn’t come as a surprise I guess, because most everybody thinks that Obama’s plan for education is miles ahead of Romney’s.  Anyways, I also noticed that when I scrolled down they had a ton of persuasive posts and comments on the days leading up to the election, actual Election Day, and the few days after the victory.  It’s obvious that the role of this group/Facebook page is to get President Obama reelected, but also, a little less subtly, to get people out to the poles and fulfill their civic responsibility.  So, clearly I am going to focus on how they function within Obama’s campaign without actually being directly involved with it.  Don’t think that this group wasn’t responsible for at the very least a small percentage of Obama votes; they had almost 150 thousand page likes which most likely equals 150 thousand Obama votes.  Now, I know that’s not a lot when you consider the population of the United States is just over 300 million, but it is a lot for a Facebook page.  I would say that the Internet, specifically Facebook, is obviously the right choice for a campaign group like this one.  It is extremely effective at getting like-minded people together without having to actually be geographically close to each other.  And there are literally thousands of Facebook pages similar to this one; all with the intent to get people together who support the same candidate.

2.             This Facebook page for “Speak up for Education and Kids” is actually able to engage in all three of the rhetorical appeals, but not without the help of their fans and commenter’s.  I read through a lot of the post’s and comments and found that all three of the appeals are represented by the actual people/person who runs the Facebook page, while the guest’s and commenter’s reciprocate that with their reply posts.  An example of a pathos appeal would be the page’s various posts about “Kids not Cuts.”  It is actually a pledge for people to contribute to, and they will eventually take it to congress in order for some action to be taken.  You can tell that they feel the best way to gain proponents of this pledge is to emotionally appeal to them.  It seems to be working because they had a post that said they’ve gotten 12 thousand supporters to sign the pledge thus far.  That’s very predictable that an emotional appeal would warrant such success like that because as we’ve said all semester: pathos is the strongest, most effective appeal.  As for logos or logical appeals they really just use an extension of the emotional appeals.  They make you think what would be the best for my kids?  Thinking logically, any parent would want the best for their kid’s education.  They never really come out and say it, but they are, in a way, combining pathos and logos.  The logical appeal is just underlying, giving way to the more successful emotional appeal.  Finally, there is actually a strong sense of credibility or ethos appeals.  For one, they are representing a very large organization, the NEA, which is credible on its own.  Also, more apparent to us, they have tons of political leaders such as senators, congressmen/women, and others that have videos posted on their Facebook page.  This is effective because people can look at Speak up for Education and Kid’s page and say, ‘wow, if the Missouri President of the NEA is invested in this issue, then I should be too.’ By the way, that video – and many others like it – is actually posted on the group’s Facebook page.

3.             When looking at figures of speech in a candidate’s speech it’s easy to identify them.  However, when you are looking at an overall Facebook page, it is much more difficult.  I didn’t focus on any particular video on this page or any speech, but when looking at this page there is obviously examples and exemplum.  Now, be careful because those two things are slightly different.  An example is self-explanatory; it is the citation of something that happened in the past.  This page uses hundreds upon hundreds of examples, but one of those would be when they post an article such as this one about Kids not Cuts.  An example of exemplum would be when someone directly quotes someone else.  This happens quite often on their page.  For example there is a post that includes a quote from an article about Glenda Ritz.  Now, it’s not a quote from anyone famous, but it is a very clear form of exemplum even though it’s not directly in a speech.

4.             Finally, in order to find fallacies without using a video or any kind of speech, I went into the photos page.  I found two photos that demonstrated false causation and reductio ad absurdum.  They are both very similar because there is a little bit of each of those two fallacies in each one.  The first one shows a sign that reads, “We have no future without public schools.”  That is clearly not true, and the fact is, no politician ever said that we were going to get rid of public schools.  All that would happen would be budget/funding cuts.  So, this statement is mostly absurd, but also shows a little bit false causation because cutting funding or making cuts doesn’t equal the schools closing down; there are many other factors that would get to that drastic conclusion.  The second picture shows an adorable girl holding a sign that says, “If you cut education, how will I be able to read this sign?”  Now, that is also clearly a reductio ad absurdum fallacy as well as false causation because it is so rash to just say that cuts to education’s funding will result in children not being able to read.  Now, these pictures, and many others like these two, are no doubt fallacies engaged in by this Facebook page/group.  I would say they are flawed because nobody actually believes that cutting some funding could possibly equal the loss of all public schools forever.  Fallacies weaken your argument.  It may work at first when everyone is all “hyped up,” but when you really take time and think about it, it is clearly ridiculous.

Political Advertisements

My overall topic through the first two blog posts has been education.  There have been many advertisements concerning education because it’s a topic that people care and feel strongly about in most cases.  In this case, I chose an older advertisement from Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley’s 2006 campaign.  In this blog we will take a look at what type of advertisement it is.  For example, is it praising the candidate, condemning the opponent, or responding to charges?  We will also focus on the different ways the advertisement engages its audience by utilizing ethos, pathos, or logos.  Finally, we will be analyzing how the ad engages in the figures of speech and rhetorical fallacies.

1.            To start, the ad is obviously only a 30 second spot.  However, that does not mean it didn’t have an adequate amount of content.  There are basically three categories of political advertisements that Trent, Friedenberg, and Denton have outlined for us: praising the candidate, condemning the opponent, or responding to charges.  Many ads, including this one will, utilize more than one category in the same 30-second spot.  This ad chooses to have the first half condemning his opponent, which in this particular race is incumbent Bob Ehrlich.  He talks about three big ways that Ehrlich has ruined college education in Maryland.  This can be very effective because the audience listens to this ad and now Ehrlich’s name is associated with having a bad plan for education.  Then, he gets around to praising himself in the second half of the ad.  He gives three main points about what his plan involves for getting the education system of Maryland back on track.  This is the second category that he uses in just this one short 30-second advertisement, and it’s very effective because not only does he get to bash the incumbent’s failed strategies in the beginning of the ad, he gets to follow up and tell people what he will do differently.  People like to hear what a politicians specific plans are, and he does that in this ad directed at education.

2.            Politicians favor emotional appeals when it comes to advertising.  Education is one of those topics they will use to tug on the heartstrings of parents and even students.  Obviously those two groups of people want the best education possible and so does pretty much everyone.  So, when people hear an ad of a candidate outlining their plan for education they get stirred up and will more likely become engaged.  O’Malley chooses to focus much of this ad on pathos appeals.  As Joseph Tuman says, “This is the speech rhetoric that persuades and affects an audience because it appeals to them on an emotional level” (67).  As I’ve said, appealing to people’s emotions may be the single strongest way to engage an audience.  Another part of the ad that may affect more of the audience’s sub-conscience is the music.  We listen to music for an emotional boost sometimes, right?  Ads do that same type of thing; they will use music to actually tell us how to feel at different points.  For example, listen to the music in the first half of the ad and compare it to the music in the second half.  The music starts out like something out of the Pink Panther.  Meaning it was very “prancy” and seeming like something bad was happening.  Then, when they started praising him, the music instantly changed to be a pleasant, flowing piano sound.  That change in music is supposed to be a subtle emotional or pathos appeal.  It is very effective in movies and TV shows, so that is why they use musical effect in ads as well.  He doesn’t utilize ethos, and only uses one logos appeal, which is actually somewhat predictable.  For one, the ad doesn’t have the length of a 15-minute speech; there is not enough time to get to all three appeals in one short 30-second spot.  However, he does use that 40% statistic in the first half of his ad.  Statistics scream out “logical appeal.”  So, yes, he does technically have two of the three appeals represented in his ad.  However, this ad was mainly meant to reach families and young adults in an emotional way and that is exactly what it accomplishes.

3.            The main figure of speech that is utilized in this ad is accumulation.  This happens when two or more clauses are said in succession, stating basically the same thing, in order to emphasize a point.  In the ad, when he was praising himself in the second half it says he wants to, “Freeze Tuition, Increase Scholarships, and Expand Opportunity.”  Now, essentially all those things fall under a broader topic of making the education system better in Maryland.  Another figure of speech that is used in this ad is an example.  This is another one of the most common figures of speech, which means it is also one of the most effective.  An example is pretty self-explanatory; it means that the ad refers to a specific example from the past.  In this ad there is one specific example that he uses to bash his opponent.  It says, “Under this Governor, college tuition has increased by over 40%.”  This has a big impact on people, making it very effective.  Like I previously stated, it will make people associate “this Governor” (meaning Ehrlich) with an increasing college tuition wreaking havoc on the young adults of Maryland.

4.            Rhetorical fallacies are used by almost everyone in politics.  However, they can be very flawed sometimes.  In this case, the fallacy of questionable statistics is being utilized.  I’ve already talked about that 40% stat that is used to bash his opponent.  Again, the ad was saying that college tuition has increased 40% under the current Governor.  However, college tuition has been on the rise all throughout the country.  The ad never says if it was up 40% in just Maryland or not.  So, that is where this fallacious statement is flawed, but they still choose to put it in the ad because they know a lot of people will take that as absolute fact.  Since, the ad is only 30-seconds I don’t think there are any other fallacies present.

            Political ads rule the airwaves for a long period of time leading up to major elections.  As we’ve learned they are very calculated.  They look at what category they are going to fulfill, what rhetorical appeals they are going to make, what figures of speech and rhetorical fallacies they are going to employ.  And by the way, Martin O’Malley won this 2006 election over the incumbent Bob Ehrlich for Governor of Maryland.

Jeb Bush's Oratory

Jeb Bush seemingly had a lot to say in his speech at the Republican National Convention (RNC), but as we deconstruct his oratory we’ll see exactly what was said and how successful it was.

           

1.)            First of all, his specific audience was Republicans at the RNC.  That is whom he was primarily talking to; however, there were obviously the people watching on television, and he was even talking to the Democrats that were watching or listening.  He engaged in some common ground by making emotional maneuvers such as talking about “who wants the best for their kids.”  Obviously every single parent in the nation and world is going to want the best education that they can afford for their kids.  So, with that simple phrase, he’s sure to grab Democratic and Republicans parent’s attention.  Now, his very specific and immediate audience was his state of Florida in which he was former Governor.  So, the residents of Florida had already heard about this plan for Education; they have even lived it.  What I mean is, Jeb Bush had already implemented a plan where you and your parents could choose your high school in Florida, and to prove how that program worked so well, he brought a student up on stage to speak on how that program benefitted him.  That’s another ploy to get our emotions in a bunch.  That makes us as students and parents see that with Mitt Romney, a system like that may be achievable.  Now, whether that would be true or not doesn’t matter, it will get the thought into people’s minds and that is all that needs to be done.  You could tell that the audience like him and what he was saying because they were constantly clapping for everything.

2.)            I have already mentioned some of the rhetorical appeals he had in his speech, but there were plenty more.  A good speech is deemed a good speech because of the way it appeals to the audience.  For the Ethos or credibility appeals, he gets them out of the way early.  In the very beginning of his speech he introduces himself through his better-known family members.  He says, “I’ve been so blessed to be part of a family that has committed its life to public service.”  That is one main way to show your credibility.  Also, he talked throughout is speech about what he had done in Florida during his tenure as Governor.  He really appeals to the audience through his credibility for sure.  He also relies on Pathos or emotional appeal throughout his speech.  Like I previously stated, he brought a former high school student up onstage who benefitted from Bush’s education programs which elicited a big emotional response from the present audience and even myself as I was watching it.  He doesn’t use Logos or logical appeals except at the end when he says, “Because he is a former Governor, Mitt Romney understands that states must lead this national movement.”  This is just about the only logical appeal he uses in his whole entire speech.

3.)            Next, he utilizes many figures of speech as stated by Joseph Tuman in his book Political Communication in American Campaigns.  One of the figures of speech Bush uses is anaphora.  Now, all that means is that he repeated a phrase many times within his speech.  If you listened to the speech you probably noticed that while the broad focus was on education, he talked about gaining “Equal Opportunity” for our students, teachers, and schools overall.  He must have used that phrase four or five different times.  Another figure of speech he used is called accumulation.  This means that he would usually use three different phrases in succession to describe one thing or situation.  He did this several times, but here is just one example.  A third figure of speech he used, which is very common in speeches, is and example.  An example is pretty obvious right; it’s just something that happened in the past.  So, for his example he talks about when Romney was Governor of Massachusetts, and how the education system skyrocketed under his reign.

4.)            He also utilized what are called rhetorical fallacies.  Now, a rhetorical fallacy, as Tuman states, occurs when the speaker wants to create the appearance of being rational in his speech, but employs tactics that are really anything but logical.  This obviously will happen when you are a surrogate for one main reason.  Your job as a surrogate is to bash the opposing candidate a little bit, or at least more than Mitt Romney could do without looking bad.  So, surrogates and others will stretch the truth and sometimes come up with a fallacious statement.  For example, Jeb Bush talks about how Obama is constantly blaming his brother (G.W. Bush) for his failed economic policies.  When in fact the president hasn’t really ever blamed him and they haven’t necessarily failed.  So, in this instance Bush relied on false causation in this instance when he was talking smack on President Obama.

           

          There are a lot of elements to analyze in this speech and any speech.  But going through and looking strategically at the questions about audience from chapter four of Tuman, looking for appeals of Ethos, Pathos, and Logos, looking at figures of speech, and the rhetorical fallacies Bush got into, you begin to get a feel for what was actually said.  You can see through all the fallacies and the parts with no legitimacy or meaning, and that is when you can examine the real meaning of a speech.

Republican National Convention Surrogate: Jeb Bush & Education

I will take a look at an issue that is present and valid all the time: Education.  There are a few different aspects of the education discussion that I hope to delve into throughout the duration of this class in my blog posts.  For this post, I will look at Jeb Bush’s speech at the Republican National Convention (RNC).  Yes, Bush is the brother of the recent president and is the current Governor of Florida.  Bush, assuming the role as a republican surrogate, had the stage for about fifteen minutes talking about grade school and high school (K-12) education.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nIB0aTmm-s8

I wanted to get more into secondary schooling issues such as the rising costs but that can be saved for another post.  Since there were many other speakers at the RNC, Bush focused on one topic, that being K-12 education.  He tied in what he was talking about to what he had already implemented in Florida.  Those things were all based around creating equal opportunities for students and giving them a choice of schools.  He talked about how Romney would try to implement something similar to this federally if elected.

            

Bush’s speech was a good one to look at because he did a few things well.  He was a great advocate for education because of all the programs he outlined that he got started down in Florida.  By highlighting his experience and previously implemented programs, it builds up credibility among the listeners.  This is one of the main reasons presidential candidates pick their speakers.  They wouldn’t have someone speak who has zero credibility; it wouldn’t make them look very smart as a potential president.  So, for their convention speakers the incumbent and challenger will pick people such as “Also-Ran candidates,” former presidents from their party, even respected celebrities, or, in this case, current governors who are better known in their party.  Any of these people who could potentially speak at either the Republican or Democratic Conventions are called surrogates.  Their job is to pretty much make their party’s nominee look good with a powerful keynote address.  They even tend to bash the other candidate more than either of the candidates would do to each other because the surrogates aren’t really scrutinized by the public in the way that either candidate would be if they said something controversially brutal about the other.  So, both parties take advantage of this and use their surrogates to do a little bashing of the other candidate. 

Jeb Bush’s speech had all the aspects that a surrogate’s convention speech should have.  He started off by talking about how he comes from a family of people who have “served the public;” meaning that there have been two presidents that came from his family.  Also, he spun everything to make it positive in some way.  For example, when he was talking about his brother’s tenure, George W. Bush, he said it was incredibly tough times, but he kept us save.  That isn’t even actually true because hundreds of people died on 9/11 while he was in office.  However that is not my point.  And still before he got to his main point of education he interjected a few words of criticism of President Obama’s economic policies.  Also, later in his speech he did a little more bashing on President Obama saying that he didn’t do anything productive in the realm of education during his four years.  However, he gets into his main message of revamping the education system slightly to benefit our nations future leaders.  He kept using the same upbeat phrases such as “shaping our future” and “equal opportunity.”  The purpose or function of this is to get the listeners thinking about a better future with Romney as the President in this case.  It gets the audience associating those upbeat words and phrases with the candidate that the surrogate is supporting.  It is also an emotional plea to get the audience to buy into the Republicans way of thinking on this issue.  This is accomplished in his speech by the events he highlights such as the kids he’s personally seen read their first books and other such emotional stories.  He also brings two people up on stage with him.  One is a teacher and the other is a student, both of which have benefited in some way from Governor Bush’s education programs in Florida.  They each told their stories, which were emotional in a sense, and they gave you an emotional tie to those people and in turn tied you to Mitt Romney.  There are many techniques that are used to persuade voters, and many of them work with just a small stretch of the true maybe.  The candidates can set themselves up for success with the choice of the right surrogates, speakers, and other party supporters.