Media theories of persuasion

Media Persuasion

Compare and contrast the media theories presented in the chapter. Using your experience with media, discuss the degree to which each explains your relationship with media.

Theorists such as Walter Ong focus on the importance of the medium through which persuasive and other types of communications are conveyed. The electronic media conveys a sense of intimacy. It is possible to follow a politician on Twitter, as well as listen to his or her more carefully-crafted formal speeches. The Internet allows people to gain access to everyday people through reading blogs, as well as media sources from around the world. But the Web can be deceptively intimate, and also only transmit a fairly shallow and superficial presentation of issues because the information must be conveyed quickly. The Internet has undoubtedly contributed to the polarization of the current political environment in America. If desired, people can simply read websites and listen to politicians with whom they agree, rather than be exposed to a balanced perspective on a platform geared to a more general audience. The proliferation of Internet sites makes it easy to "surf" away from complicated issues or the words of persons with whom you disagree.

Media critic Postman states that television provided greater intimacy than previous modes of communication. This denatured some of the confrontational, persuasive power that used to characterize earlier face-to-face debates. Housing someone in your living room via television makes them seem like a friend. However, the Internet has enabled people to communicate with celebrities and television figures alike, as well as merely listen to them in their homes. This demystifies public figures' mystique and breaks down barriers of civility. Instead of the "fireside chat," confrontation is very easy online with a point and a click. Even when conversing with intimates, it is very easy to say things one does not mean online. This is even more the case when one is "talking" on a political message board, where exchanges get heated very quickly, as posters are shielded by their anonymous status.

Q2. Compare and contrast the definition of persuasion provided in the chapter with those provided by Aristotle and Fotheringham (also in chapter). Use examples to illustrate your ideas.

According to Aristotle, persuasion is a multifaceted concept. It draws upon the principles of logos, ethos, and pathos. Persuasion must be logical in nature, so that the facts of what are being argued resonate with the listener. There must be an overarching ethical component to the views that are expressed. And finally, there must be an emotional and compelling component to the speech, so that the listener is moved to action. A merely emotional speech is not nearly as effective as one which is backed by logos and ethos, or vice versa. For example, when giving a speech about taxation, if a politician does not assure the public of the fact that he or she will not raise taxes, the listeners may reject what the speaker has to say, no matter how emotional and compelling the testimony. But a persuasive speech that effectively deploys rhetorical tropes will move the listeners to vote for the politician and support him or her more ardently than a factual, cool statement of the politician's support of a popular cause. A fully-fledged relationship must be built with the audience over the course of the speech.