Public Address

In this essay, I argue through analysis of the genre of campaign announcements that third-party presidential candidates have rhetorical norms of their own that address their unique challenges as political outsiders. Specifically, I contend that their announcements are a variant of the announcement genre and are warranted by the recurring situational barriers, perceived strategic constraints, and overall purposes for minor-party presidential campaigns. In addition to offering an alternative theory of third-party announcements based on analysis of over 40 such statements, I provide three case studies—including statements by Progressive Henry Wallace, Independent Eugene McCarthy, and Reform Party nominee Patrick Buchanan—to demonstrate this variant of the genre. Finally, I conclude by discussing the implications of this study for understanding third-party rhetoric.

The United States has long grappled with the question of how to maintain an appropriate combination of religion and politics in the public sphere. The current electoral cycle is no different, as Presidential candidates attempt to negotiate both the political and religious landscapes. This essay introduces a special forum on rhetoric and religion in contemporary politics and touches on some recent instances of how religious differences have played out in the current political environment. Some of the issues discussed include the separation of church and state, Mitt Romney’s membership in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormons), Rick Santorum’s conception of the “war on religion,” and the controversy over contraceptives at religious institutions and Rush Limbaugh’s attacks on a Georgetown law student.

This paper appeared in the International Encyclopedia of Strategic Communication, published in 2018.

Silence, when used in a scholarly or professional context, can take a variety of meanings. It might refer to groups or individuals who have involuntarily lost their ability to speak or to have their voices heard. However, some actors elect to remain silent to gain strategic advantage. This study is focused on those instances in which an intentional choice is made to remain silent. Strategic silence is the choice of an empowered actor who remains silent in an attempt to advance a strategic interest. This silence need not be complete—it can involve the actor saying less than he or she might have said, saying it through surrogates, or otherwise delivering a message in a lower-profile context than he or she might have. Strategic silence can be employed regardless of field. Billings and Cedergren (2015) discussed the possibility of a company using strategic silence to enhance the timing of earnings reports. Udeze, Ekwe, and Chukwuma (2013) also noted that strategic silence is frequently employed as a tool of interpersonal communication. However, much of the existing work in this area—the study of silence as a strategic choice rather than a silence which is enforced on an individual or group—comes in the area of political communication. Brummett (1980, p. 289) defined " political strategic silence " as " the refusal of a public figure to communicate verbally when that refusal (1) violates expectations, (2) draws public attributions of fairly predictable meanings, and (3) seems intentional and directed at an audience. " While Brummett was writing specifically about the political context, there is no reason that his definition must be limited to that field. Actors in virtually any field can use a strategic silence when otherwise empowered to speak. A silence becomes strategic because something else was expected. Understanding the notion of something else being expected calls for examples of what silences would and would not be strategic. For example, a corporation which does not disclose a new product when anticipated might well be employing a strategic silence. Corporate leaders might judge it in their interests to say nothing, or to say very little, in order to build anticipation about the new product, or to withhold information from competitors, or to prioritize a different product, or for a whole host of other reasons. On the other hand, a corporation which does not issue a press release with the lunch menu in their cafeteria would be practicing a much more ordinary silence. Very few outside the company would have an interest in the matter, and very few would expect the information to be released. Similarly, if the organization was under a legal order for some reason their silence would not be strategic—it would be externally imposed. An actor must be empowered and expected to speak before his or her silence becomes strategic.

William F. Buckley afforded conservatives of all stripes a provocative rhetorical style, a gladiatorial style, as I term it. The gladiatorial style is a flashy, combative style whose ultimate aim is the creation of inflammatory drama. I claim that conservatives encountered Buckley's potent arguments about God, government, and markets and the gladiatorial style simultaneously. The theatrical appeal of Buckley's gladiatorial style inspired conservative imitators with disparate beliefs and, over several decades, became one of the principal rhetorical templates for the performance of conservatism.

Traditional conceptions of rhetorical ethos treat character exclusively as an instru- ment of persuasion, but the persona of the rhetor often functions as a means of con- stituting the self in relation to a complex network of social and cultural relationships. This generative function of character becomes especially important in cases where suppressed groups attempt to find rhetorical means to alter their cir- cumstances. Using Martin Luther King Jr.’s “Letter from Birmingham Jail” as a case study, we argue that the text develops a complex and nuanced construction of King’s character. This construct allows King to criticize his target audience without alienating himself from it and also allows the “eavesdropping” black audience to discover a model for reconstructing their own sense of agency. This constitutive dimension of character occurs simultaneously and in intimate connection with its use as an instrument of persuasion concerning specific issues. Based on this case, we argue that rigid distinctions between instrumental and constitutive functions of rhetoric are misleading and that rhetorical critics should regard the constitution of self and the instrumental uses of character as a fluid relationship.

Why does support for Donald Trump remain resilient despite the preponderance of arguments and evidence that should refute so many of his claims? The answer lies in how Trump’s rhetoric fully embraces intuitively based rationales for allegiance. This chapter analyzes Donald Trump’s rhetoric throughout his campaign and presidency through the lens of moral foundations theory, which identifies clusters of value commitments that correlate with political allegiance. Trump activates connections with foundational values of his constituents through specific heuristic devices, especially loss aversion, availability, and representativeness. Synthesizing behavioral economics with the dramatistic rhetorical theories of Kenneth Burke reveals how Trump’s claims resist counterargument and what rhetorical resources offer potential avenues for alternative positions to gain traction.

Sojourner Truth's 1851 speech in Akron, commonly titled "Ain't I a Woman," stands as a landmark in the fight for racial and woman's equality. Truth spoke before a woman's rights convention, making arguments about women's physical and intellectual capacities, as well as religious arguments in support of equal rights. While it is clear that she asserted her identity as a woman and a citizen in this speech, our understanding of her words is complicated by the lack of an authentic text of her remarks. This essay explores the challenges in recovering Truth's rhetoric and offers an analysis of her arguments for equal rights. http://voicesofdemocracy.umd.edu/sojourner-truth-address-at-the-womans-rights-convention-in-akron-ohio-29-may-1851/

This paper was designed to provide Intranet traffic monitoring by sniffing the packets at the local Area Network (LAN) server end to provide security and control. It was implemented using five computer systems configured with static Internet Protocol (IP) addresses used in monitoring the IP traffic on the network by capturing and analyzing live packets from various sources and destinations in the network. The LAN was deployed on windows 8 with a D-link 16-port switch, category 6 Ethernet cable and other LAN devices. The IP traffics were captured and analyzed using Wireshark Version 2.0.3. Four network instructions were used in the analysis of the IP traffic and the results displayed the IP and Media Access Control (MAC) address sources and destinations of the frames, Ethernet, IP addresses, User Datagram Protocol (UDP) and Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP). The outcome can aid network administrators to control Intranet access and provide security.

The July 2015 nuclear agreement between Iran and the United States has been heralded by many as the best possible chance of avoiding both a nuclear armed Iran and another war in the Middle East. Although success is far from certain, the path to the deal was even less so. The fact that the Obama administration achieved a verifiable suspension of Iran's enrichment activity in November 2013 was itself a major success. What is even more remarkable is that the Obama administration was able to do so while utilizing the same mix of policy tools, diplomacy, and pressure as the George W. Bush administration. The difference in outcomes is especially confusing given the tendency of foreign policy experts to hold that President Obama and President Bush's foreign policy worldviews are relatively identical. I argue that a rhetorical perspective provides the answer. Specifically, President Obama responded to the challenge of Iran's nuclear program by fashioning a frame of responsibility in a comic fashion, shifting the obligation to resolve the standoff peacefully onto both Iran and the United States. A crucial aspect of this rhetorical strategy was that it presented the Iranian regime with the option of rejoining the global community (albeit on restricted terms). Thus, Obama presented a hybrid of Kenneth Burke's tragic and comic frames that chastised the Iranian regime for dangerous behavior while acknowledging American guilt, error, and responsibility for bringing the nuclear stand-off to a peaceful end.

This study explores the pragmatist thought of the Indian politician and “untouchable” rights activity, Bhimrao Ambedkar. Ambedkar’s connection to the pragmatist tradition through John Dewey is discussed, as well as the various lines of influence that Dewey had upon his work once back in India. Beyond this general appraisal, this chapter exhaustively charts the echoes of Dewey’s words, phrases, and ideas in Ambedkar’s vital "Annihilation of Caste” text, showing that pragmatism influenced his as both a source of ideas as well as a method of rhetorical practice. Ambedkar’s pragmatist appropriations lead to his grafting of Deweyan ideas of democracy onto his battle against Indian caste oppression, as well as general reconstructive rhetorical method.

From: "Recovering Overlooked Pragmatists in Communication: Extending the Living Conversation about Pragmatism and Rhetoric," Robert Danisch, (Ed.), Palgrave.

In 1925, Herbert Wichelns published The Literary Criticism of Oratory. By
many accounts, the essay would become the founding document of the academic study of rhetoric and public address. However, in that same year, historian Carter G. Woodson published Negro Orators and Their Orations, which focused on the study of the African American oratorical tradition. In this essay, by way of speculative history and using my sanctified imagination, I wonder what an alternative or speculative history would look like if
we can conceive Woodson as challenging the dominant (exclusively white) notions of public address and rhetorical praxis. By paying particular attention to Woodson’s introduction in Negro Orators and Their Orations, I submit that not only would we have been introduced to the richness and power of the African American public address tradition earlier but, more importantly, who we start to see as scholars and what we call scholarship would be different as well.

This dissertation aims to map the evolutionary history of the talking filibuster as a rhetorical form. Since Senators can forego a talking filibuster and obstruct a bill with a secret hold, filibustering is a strategic rhetorical choice. In addition to the textuality of filibustering, then, what performative and symbolic rhetorical work is done by the filibuster that secret holds do not do? I argue that the filibuster is a form of populist transcendence, an innovative rhetorical technique for transcending senatorial elitism. Chapter two studies Robert La Follette and his era: the fin de siècle. This populist agrarian used lengthy deliberation and filibustering as “temporal republicanism” to slow legislative proceedings during the social acceleration of the industrial age. In response to La Follette’s deliberative filibusters, Senate rules were changed to stymie him. With deliberation restricted, filibustering Senators had to create and maintain a scene to hold the floor. Chapters three and four study Huey Long and "Frank Capra’s Mr. Smith Goes to Washington," the personae they adopted, and the suffering they underwent to create their dramatic filibusters. However, Frank Capra’s film over-dramatized the visuals and motorized the pacing of the filibuster to create a spectacular caricature of the form for mass entertainment. Finally, in our social-media age, the filibuster has taken on a hybrid form: synthesizing spectacular drama with deliberation. Chapter five studies Wendy Davis and her ability to interact with citizens through social media. The co-creation of the filibuster by senators and citizens produced identification, empathy, deliberation, and dramatic political action when citizens went to the Texas capitol and shouted from the gallery to kill the bill. Using Jacques Rancière, I find that this new form of filibustering blurs the line between actors and audience and can emancipate spectators. Thus, social media is re-enlivening both the dramatic and deliberative aspects of filibustering. Overall, the filibuster began as a deliberative form, became a dramatic form, and now within the social media spectacle, deliberation and drama are synthesizing.

This study investigates how leaders call for change while also caring for their organizations. The theoretical framework comes from the interdisciplinary study of a type of religious communication called prophetic rhetoric and developed by scholars of communication, English, and homiletics. That framework is used here in the analyses of speeches and public letters by leaders who challenge ideologies and practices shaped by and contributing to racial injustice. More specifically, this dissertation studies how audiences’ white fragility leads to constrained prophetic rhetoric that is a communication strategy inviting change without destroying organizations or being expelled from them. From analyses of such rhetoric in religious contexts, this study produces a model of pastoral rhetoric that combines nurture and challenge and can apply to leadership in other types of organizations.

Building on the notion of post-truth, this essay suggests that Donald Trump - both as a candidate and president - has crafted a notion of post-presumption argumentation. While there are many theories of how presumption functions in argumentation, scholars agree that it is largely a procedural device meant to promote deliberation. The essay suggests that post-presumption argumentation has become a new model - rising partly from a cultural shift triggered by rampant conspiracy theorizing by political and social elites - that undercuts the presumption of veracity, undermines faith in institutions that give presumptions force, and rejects deliberation as a communal goal.

The author examines community-focused apologies within international affairs. Specifically, he argues that this form of rhetoric functions as a rhetorical first step to healing relationships that have been hurt by the transgressions one group committed against another. In international affairs, transnational actors, typically nation-states through their political leaders, articulate community-focused apologia to mend relations between peoples, which may serve build a common path toward peace and deepen relationships between these actors. To illustrate this idea, he uses Japanese Prime Minister Tomiichi Murayama's 1995 apology for crimes Japan committed during its wartime past. Murayama's apology was an important step in mending relations between Japan and its neighbors. This article provides a better understanding as to the motives and options rhetors may use in apologizing for past injustices and serves to broaden the way we conceptualize the rhetorical genre of apologia.

Kofi Annan traveled to Rwanda in May of 1998 attempting to repair the image of the United Nations (U.N.) and to heal the fractured political relationship between the two entities. However, the U.N. secretary general largely failed to fulfill his mission. This article analyzes the reasons why Annan's mea culpa failed. It argues that in Annan's address before the Rwandan parliament, his rhetorical choices constrained his ability to repair the U.N.'s image and U.N.-Rwandan relations. Specifically, this article demonstrates that the U.N. leader's nondiscussion of his personal culpability for U.N. action, his democratization of blame for the genocide, and the appearance of personal arrogance created by his language choices hindered his ability to fulfill his mission. The article concludes with implications for image repair theory, lessons from Annan's failure for rhetors who apologize for historical wrongdoing, and directions for further research into the phenomena of public apology.

A sustained form can be located in the complicated history of populist rhetoric. Despite its chameleonic qualities, the advancement of populism is constituted by alterations in the focus and content, not the structure, of populist activism. This structure, or what I term its argumentative frame, positions a virtuous people against a powerful enemy and expresses disdain toward traditional forms of democratic deliberation and republican representation. I trace these themes through the rhetoric of the People's Party, Huey Long, and George Wallace. I conclude by analyzing the link between populism's persistence in U.S. history and the nation's Founding.

Finding addresses has become a major challenge because of population growth and its corresponding effect on city expansion. The use of postcodes is essential to save time and effort in reaching a destination. This research focuses on the use of geographical coordinates to automatically generate postcodes in defining addresses. The proposed approach is based on the use of cadastral maps. The postcode label in cadastral maps is processed by using image processing tools. The proposed method has been applied on cadastral map to give postcode for each parcel. The proposed method has also been applied to the forest map to provide a code for each tree. The obtained post code can be easily integrated into navigation software, and people can use the code to reach their destination. The postcode in this system is suggested to be used alone without a need for building number or street name.

In this dissertation, using classical and contemporary rhetorical theory I examine the public advocacy efforts of American scientists as they respond to perceived threats by elected officials on the integrity of science and its role in policymaking. Through analyzing texts including presidential addresses by the American Association for the Advancement of Science, open letters by the Union of Concerned Scientists, Stand Up for Science rallies, and the evolution of the March for Science mission statement, I explicate the diverse ways in which scientists understand the relationship and obligation of scientists and science to society. The epistemic positionality of science and scientists manifests differently in the cases analyzed, and coincides with a wide range of rhetorical strategies built upon those differences, from economic prosperity, American exceptionalism and patriotism, and social and environmental justice framing, to war metaphors, parrhesia, eunoia, and transcendent and constitutive rhetorics. The different conceptualizations of the scientist and citizen subjectivities have shown a trend toward integration that demonstrates the emergence of what I call the scientist-citizen. As scientists increasingly reflect on their professional and social obligations in response to contemporary sociopolitical tensions, they find a rightful place not only in the lab but also in the public square.

This essay argues that Senator Rand Paul’s address at Howard University in April 2013, meant to bridge racial divides between the Republican Party and Black voters, actually represented a second-generation Southern Strategy. After tracing the original Southern Strategy, designed to polarize the electorate based on fears of Black enfranchisement, to the GOP in the 1960s, the essay defines its new form as a rhetoric depending on selective amnesia, neoliberalism, and postracialism. After demonstrating how each of those characteristics surfaced in Paul’s address, the essay discusses the implications of his speech and his later attempts to learn from his failures.

This essay examines 1970s lesbian-feminist identity rhetorics to
interrogate the exclusionary logics of visibility and gender normativity. Lesbian-feminists used such logics to exclude women living “in the closet,” performing gender in nonnormative ways, or avowing a transgender identity. Those struggles form a dynamic context to situate and critically analyze Robin Morgan’s keynote address at the 1973 West Coast Lesbian Conference, “Lesbianism and Feminism: Synonyms or Contradictions?” Though Morgan’s address exemplifies rhetorical violence of identity politics and transphobia within lesbian-feminist communities, I explore its radically queer possibilities to shed fresh light on persistent struggles that shape contemporary queer politics.

This article examines the rhetorical phenomenon of collective apology. Specifically, collective
apologies issued by American President Bill Clinton, Australian Prime Minister
Kevin Rudd, and Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper were analyzed inductively
to determine the purposes and strategies that make up these speeches. This inductive
approach reveals that the purpose of collective apologies is to repair relationships
damaged by historical wrongdoing. Moreover, it is found that rhetors use the rhetorical
strategies of remembrance, mortification, and corrective action. Ultimately, this research
lays the groundwork for collective apology to be considered a distinct rhetorical genre.

This essay examines how political leaders apologize for historical injustices.
Specifically, we analyze Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s apology for
the head tax imposed upon Chinese immigrants. The prime minister’s apology was
historic in that it marked the first time a Canadian Prime Minister formally
apologized for the head tax. We argue that Harper used a combination of the
frontier myth and collective apology rhetoric in his expression of remorse toward
the Chinese-Canadian community. While controversial, this rhetoric created a
discursive space for a constructive and strengthened relationship between the
Chinese-Canadian community and the Canadian government.

Intercultural contexts introduce unique sources of complexity into our theories of rhetoric and persuasion. This study examines one of the most successful cases of intercultural rhetoric concerning religion: the case of Swami Vivekananda, a Hindu monk from India who came to the United States in 1893 for the World's Parliament of Religions. He arrived as an unknown monk, but he left America years later as the nationally known face of Hinduism. Facing a tense scene in 1893 that featured a plurality of religions and American organizers and audiences who judged Hinduism as inferior to Christianity, Vivekananda enacted a unique rhetoric of pluralism to assert the value of his form of Hinduism while simultaneously respecting other religions. This study extracts from Vivekananda's popular performance at the parliament a pluralistic style of rhetorical advocacy, one that builds upon his unique reading of Hindu religious-philosophical traditions. This pluralistic style can be used to unravel some of the theoretical issues created by invitational rhetoric's reading of persuasion as inherently violent to disagreeing others.