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.