which purpose might a political persuasive speech serve

Political Persuasion: Creating and Engaging Your Audiences

Every political campaign or organization wants to convince and mobilize enough voters to win their election or advance their organization’s cause. However, convincing voters to support your campaign or cause is not an easy task. While political persuasion is a valuable tool for campaigns and causes to assemble the support they need to win, it’s a time-consuming practice that requires effective communication and voter targeting to execute it well. In this blog, we will define political persuasion, the types of voter audiences you may want to target in your persuasion universe, and how you can engage with those voters effectively with tools from NGP VAN.

Watch our webinar below on Creating and Engaging Political Persuasion Audiences!  

What is Political Persuasion?   

Political persuasion is the art of convincing voters to support your campaign. It’s a valuable tactic for many campaigns and causes that may not be able to win their race without convincing unlikely supporters to support their efforts. Creating a persuasion universe is necessary when there aren’t enough likely supporters to hit your win number or you want to expand your margin of victory in the upcoming election. Political persuasion is particularly effective for a few groups of voters that you can easily target in VAN. But first, let’s describe the differences between persuasion and mobilization.

Is Political Persuasion Different from Political Mobilization?   

While political persuasion is focused on convincing voters to support your campaign, political mobilization focuses on getting identified and likely supporters out to vote. Some may only execute mobilization efforts because they have a comfortable margin of identified and likely supporters for their campaign or cause, but that’s not the case everywhere.   

Political persuasion differs from mobilization in more than just its ultimate goal. It also requires more planning and message development, more communications and “touches” (contacts with voters), and savvier communicators. As we mentioned before, these audiences will likely need different messages served to them to convince them to support your campaign. For instance, messaging that works well with voters who don’t know you may not work well with voters of different political parties. Your persuasion universe will likely require more communications (or “touches”) to secure their support than your mobilization universe. Finally, communicating with your persuasion audience typically requires savvy communicators who can adapt and address issues that this audience may raise. It’s also beneficial to find trusted volunteers who can communicate respectfully with those who have different opinions than their own.  

What Is a Persuasion Universe?  

With those differences in mind, we can now share the audiences that may be most effective to include in your persuasion universe. A persuasion universe is the group of voters you will contact to convince them to support your campaign or cause. However, this group of voters will not be as likely to support your campaign as your mobilization universe (which is composed of likely and identified supporters).  

Types of Voter Audiences for Persuasive Politics  

Several voter audiences may be potential targets for your persuasion universe. To target these groups effectively, you will want to serve them different messages to convince them to support your campaign or cause. Here are three common groups that may need to be in your persuasion universe. 

People Who Do Not Know Your Campaign or Cause Yet

These people may not know who you are, but they may support you once they learn more about you and where you stand on the issues.

Members of Another Political Party

While these people are unlikely to support your campaign or cause, there are likely some of them that may be upset with the direction of their political party, the candidate who is running on their party’s ticket, or another factor that may present you an opportunity to convince them to support your campaign or cause or just not vote for your opponent or opposing cause.

People Who Are Not Likely to Support Your Campaign or Cause

While some of these people may fall into one of the other groups we discuss here, some may not be likely to support your campaign or cause due to a stance on a particular issue or some other factor. While these voters may be more difficult to target, they may be another valuable persuasion audience to engage with.

Creating Your Persuasion Universe  

VAN makes it easy to create your persuasion universe through several scores and other targeting parameters. You can use ideology or support scores and past voting history to find a group of voters that will be critical to your campaign or organization’s success. Your persuasion universe will be unique to your campaign or organization, but you should understand how many voters you must convince to win your race. Once you have that determined, you can build your persuasion universe to meet or exceed that number to set your campaign or cause up for success. 

Identifying Supporters In Your Persuasion Universe  

As you begin your outreach to your persuasion universe, you will want to gather a Supporter ID score that you can use for outreach later in the campaign. Campaigns will usually create a Supporter ID Survey Question with responses from 1 to 5 (1 indicating strong support for your campaign or cause and 5 indicating strong opposition to your campaign or cause). Once you progress through contacting your persuasion universe and gather more data, you can better understand how you are advancing towards your win number. You will then add those supporters (those marked as a 1 or 2) into your mobilization universe. Depending on how many supporters you identified in your first pass and how much time is left in the election cycle, you will likely need to make another pass through your persuasion universe to those who you were unable to contact during the first pass, undecided voters, and those who are leaning towards supporting your opponent or opposing cause (those marked as a 3 or 4). 

Unique Benefits of Campaign Channels for Political Persuasion  

The best channels for political persuasion are those through which you can have one-on-one conversations with voters either in-person or over the phone. However, there are a few other methods that may have varying levels of success. After creating your persuasion universe in VAN, you can determine what areas may be ideal for canvassing and phone banking based on their geographic spread. Ideally, you’d be able to contact this universe multiple times through several channels. But to start, you may want to canvass in areas of higher voter density and make calls in areas with lower voter density. 

Canvassing with MiniVAN

Door-to-door canvassing is one of the most effective channels to employ political persuasion. With our mobile canvassing app, MiniVAN, your campaign or cause can easily guide volunteers’ conversations with voters, record valuable data, and sync it instantly back to VAN to act on later in the campaign. MiniVAN even offers the ability to use branched scripts that offer different questions and prompts based on a voter’s answers. Additionally, MiniVAN allows you to choose a default script and up to four alternates to give your canvassers up to five scripts to employ, or you can choose a default script and alternate scripts based on a target’s subgroup.

Phone Banking with OpenVPB

Phone banking is another effective method to contact voters in your persuasion universe. Similarly to MiniVAN, OpenVPB now allows users to create phone banks that can map different scripts to different people and allow callers to toggle between scripts.

Other Methods Phone Banking with OpenVPB

While one-on-one conversations allow campaigns and causes to address concerns or issues from your persuasion universe, other broader contact methods may play a role in convincing voters to support your campaign or cause. For instance, some voters may value endorsements from elected officials or advocacy groups , digital ads that communicate why you’re the better candidate for the job, or something else to determine how they’ll vote in an upcoming election.

What Purpose Might a Persuasive Political Speech Serve?

Persuasive political speeches may sway some voters to support your campaign, but the impact of these speeches is difficult to measure. Depending on the size of your race, speeches at large rallies may serve as a valuable motivator to drive additional action for your campaign from your supporters. Also, speeches at debates may be a valuable opportunity to convince people to support your campaign or not vote for your opponent because the debate is likely televised or shared with a larger group of potential voters. In other words, while the impact of persuasive political speeches is difficult to measure, in the right circumstances, it may be a valuable opportunity to drive additional action or garner support.

Creating & Engaging Persuasion Audiences with NGP VAN

Through voter targeting in VAN and effective voter outreach through tools like MiniVAN and OpenVPB, you can easily and effectively create and engage with your persuasion audience to help you achieve your campaign or organization’s goals. Get started with NGP VAN today to set your campaign up for success . 

Explore more from our blog

Privacy Overview

Communication

iResearchNet

Custom Writing Services

Political persuasion.

Persuasion is an integral part of politics and a necessary component of the pursuit and exercise of power. Political persuasion is a process in which communicators try to convince other people to change their attitudes or behavior regarding a political issue through messages, in an atmosphere of free choice (Perloff 2003, 34). As the field of political communication has grown, so too has the number of studies exploring the processes and effects of political persuasive communication. Political persuasion involves the application of persuasion principles to a context in which most individuals possess the seemingly incompatible characteristics of harboring strong feelings about a host of issues, yet caring precious little about the context in which these issues are played out.

Cognitive Processing

In order to understand political persuasion impact, one must appreciate the processes by which messages achieve their effects). Cognitive processing models such as the elaboration likelihood model (see Petty et al. 2003) emphasize that under low political motivation or ability , voters base decisions on heuristics and are susceptible to cues peripheral to the main message, such as candidate attractiveness, political party labels, endorsements, and even the degree to which political names are repeated or are smooth-sounding. Some researchers argue that in these low-involvement situations, individuals lack political attitudes altogether and therefore can be swayed by factors that are momentarily salient in the political environment, variables that may be of such a transient nature they are devoid of any substantive meaning (Bishop 2005).

By contrast, when individuals are motivated or able to consider political issues, they centrally process message arguments, recalling arguments they perceive to be personally important and thinking through issues, although such thinking is invariably biased by strongly held values or self-interest. In politics, where attitudes and prejudices are formed at an early age, much highly involved processing is biased processing. Consequently, the political persuasion that occurs through debates, advertising, news, and blogs frequently falls under the category of reinforcement, attitude strengthening, or converting attitudes into voting behavior. The vast array of political communications also can change attitudes, frequently subtly and indirectly, as when messages access deeply held values, prime standards for candidate evaluation, and influence the salience of political issues (West 2005).

Levels Of Influence

While researchers generally focus on specific types of political persuasion, we can understand this process more clearly by examining both the direction of influence and the various levels at which this persuasive influence occurs.

If a democratic system is to function efficiently, political persuasion occurs in both directions, bottom-up and top-down. The public must be able to persuade politicians to enact public policies that reflect the will of the people. This persuasion can be expressed by the will of the majority, such as by a mandate in a winning election, but it can also be expressed by the minority, such as in the influence of special interests and lobbyists. Alternatively, the direction of influence can go from political leaders to the public. Politicians must be able to persuade the public to support their agenda of foreign policy, domestic, and legislative initiatives. For example, the government uses various means of political persuasion to persuade the people to support foreign military action, or support new domestic initiatives such as sweeping health-care reform or the privatization of pension provision.

Ultimately, it is the media that are the critical links in this process – regardless of direction – as they transmit carefully crafted messages by government agencies (for example White House propaganda in the war on Iraq; Kellner 2004), convey the strength of public support of policies by reporting public opinion polls (Mutz & Soss 1997), and act as gatekeepers and framers of the daily flow of political news (Williams & Deli Carpini 2000).

Along with direction of influence, we must understand the practice of political persuasion across levels. At the interpersonal level there is ongoing political persuasion occurring within the halls of legislative bodies, where law-makers engage in endless armtwisting of their colleagues while seeking support and votes for legislation. The so-called “Johnson treatment” is a case in point. As a senator in the 1950s, the former US president Lyndon Johnson was particularly effective in gaining the support of his Democratic colleagues by exploiting tactics of persuasive interpersonal communication. In more recent years Johnson’s techniques have been refined through the use of non-stop opinion polls, made famous during the presidencies of Reagan and Clinton.

Political persuasion at the interpersonal level also occurs among individuals, dyads, and groups within the public. This is most apparent during political campaigns as supporters attempt to convert the undecided as well as rally the faithful. The persuasiveness of interpersonal political communication has become more apparent in recent elections as the use of the Internet, including emails and blogs, has been found to be an important means of rallying political support and fundraising (e.g., the Howard Dean 2004 and Barack Obama 2008 presidential campaigns). Internet campaigns by special interest groups have also been found to be effective in spurring letter-writing, phone calls, and emails to members of parliaments to persuade them to vote for particular legislation. In addition, at the intergroup level members of the public participate in political rallies, marches, and protests that can often be effective means of persuading politicians to pay greater attention to specific social causes or legislative issues.

Most research in the area of political persuasion occurs within the context of elections. At the societal level , political advertising has been found to influence the voting decisions and affect the political knowledge of voters in the US (Just et al. 1990). Although derided by critics, negative political ads have been shown to be effective (Perloff 1998). Tactics of persuasion during elections have been practiced and perfected by political consultants (Thurber & Nelson 2000). As inordinate amounts of money are becoming increasingly important in successful political campaigns, candidates and party leaders must persuade donors to make financial contributions. Lastly, throughout the campaign candidates make promises to voters as a means of winning their votes, although means of accountability for broken promises are much less clear.

Converging across levels, attempts at political persuasion by interest groups must continually battle for legitimization from the greater public at large, public officials, and the media. Even as some interest groups find great success in persuading both public and politicians of their message, many other “fringe” groups (e.g., proponents of a 9/11 coverup) may never find their message well received, despite their persuasive attempts.

Media Forms And Frames

Like other forms of political communication, politically persuasive messages are not always truthful and honest, and it is up to media watchdogs and the public to sort out fact from fiction. Politically persuasive messages also take different forms across various media. The goal of films like Michael Moore’s Fahrenheit 9/11 and Al Gore’s An Inconvenient Political Persuasion Truth is to persuade individuals to support a particular set of political beliefs. In addition, both TV talk shows and talk radio have continued to become more pervasive in the US and other countries, and a myriad of talk-show hosts both entertain and try to persuade their audience that their opinions are right, while also inducing reinforcement effects. Thus, the mediated campaign environment represents the battleground in the fight for the “hearts and minds” of public and elites. Legitimation of message is a crucial aspect of persuasion, and the media are primary sources of political information, whether about candidates or about issues. But the media are not simple conduits for information. Journalistic routines influence what and how news is presented.

How information is framed also affects how it is processed, with what elements it is stored and related in the public’s mind, and ultimately how persuasive it may be. Framing provides the audience with a workable model to interpret complex and often confusing information. In this sense, framing is an extension of agenda setting. Agenda setting was seen as the outcome of journalists’ roles, activities, and values. Hence the media tell us what to think about, if not specifically what to think. Traditionally, this was viewed as a laissez-faire phenomenon, but more recently the setting of the media agenda (and through that the public’s agenda) has been seen as the result of an intention to create the media’s own effects (Lakoff 2004).

But framing is a multilevel phenomenon. Elites and special interest groups attempt to create – or manipulate, depending on your perspective – the public agenda by providing poll-tested linguistic constructions of highly charged political issues. Media, using their own norms and values, select and present information about these issues. The public itself interprets mediated information through its own preconceptions and attitudes.

Initially, framing may be more effective in low-involvement situations, providing simple explanations for events, in line with peripheral processing. Once the frame is set, it can be activated for processing other persuasive messages. Kosicki (2002) argued that framing is consistent with schematic information processing.

Framing operates at both a sociological and a psychological level. When the media present themes that explain basic episodic news (persons and events), there are inherent ideologies, values, and symbols that help to shape context. When individuals use these themes to assess cause and effect, heroes and villains, and right and wrong, the psychological processes are in full play (Iyengar & Simon 1993).

Ambiguity Of Political Persuasion

Ultimately, political persuasion can be best viewed along a continuum – one end anchored in the harmful effects of propaganda, the other in the positive effects of marches and demonstrations leading to civil rights legislation, with a great deal in between. Back in 1922 Walter Lippmann said that the media create a pseudo-reality (Lippmann 1922), but in the age of corporate news media, the “mediation of reality,” in which persuasive messages are delivered by the media, is frequently guided more by purposes such as gaining revenue or influence than by journalistic standards.

Political persuasion remains an ambiguous phenomenon, raising time-honored questions that date back to ancient Greek philosophy. Do political persuasive messages enhance or debase democracy? Do advertisements inform voters about candidates’ positions or mislead them by presenting vacuous statements and feel-good pictures? As campaigns move to the Internet, new questions are emerging, such as whether campaigns will enhance direct communication between leaders and citizens or increase the potential for deception in a milieu unchecked by nonpartisan news media. Theory and research suggest that technology will bring benefits, but also offer new gimmicks in an old game.

References:

• Bishop, G. W. (2005). The illusion of public opinion: Fact and artifact in American public opinion polls . Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.
• Iyengar, S., & Simon, A. (1993). News coverage of the Gulf crisis and public opinion. Communication Research , 20, 363–383.
• Just, M. R., Crigler, A. N., & Wallach, L. (1990). Thirty seconds or thirty minutes: What viewers learn from spot advertisements and candidate debates. Journal of Communication , 40, 120– 133.
• Kellner, D. (2004). Media propaganda and spectacle in the war on Iraq: A critique of U.S. broadcasting networks. Cultural Studies/Critical Methodologies , 4, 329–338.
• Kosicki, G. M. (2002). The media priming effect: News media and conversations affecting political judgments. In J. P. Dillard & M. Pfau (eds.), The persuasion handbook: Developments in theory and practice . Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, pp. 63–81.
• Lakoff, G. (2004). Don’t think of an elephant! Know your values and frame the debate . Chelsea Green. Lippmann, W. (1922). Public opinion . New York: Harcourt Brace.
• Mutz, D. C., & Soss, J. (1997). Reading public opinion: The influence of news coverage on perceptions of public sentiment. Public Opinion Quarterly , 61, 431–451.
• Perloff, R. M. (1998). Political communication: Politics, press, and public in America . Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
• Perloff, R. M. (2003). The dynamics of persuasion: Communication and attitudes in the 21st century , 2nd edn. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
• Petty, R. E., Wheeler, S. C., & Tormala, Z. L. (2003). Persuasion and attitude change. In T. Millon & M. J. Lerner (eds.), Handbook of psychology . Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley, vol. 5, pp. 353–382.
• Thurber, J. A., & Nelson, C. J. (2000). Campaign warriors: The role of political consultants in elections . Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
• West, D. M. (2005). Air wars: Television advertising in election campaigns, 1952–2004 , 4th edn. Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly Press.
• Williams, B. A., & Deli Carpini, M. X. (2000). Unchained reaction: The collapse of media gatekeeping and the Clinton–Lewinsky scandal. Journalism , 1, 61–85.

Featured Topics

Featured series.

A series of random questions answered by Harvard experts.

Explore the Gazette

Read the latest.

Historian sees a warning for today in post-Civil War U.S.

McCarthy says immigration, abortion, economy to top election issues

Harvard stargazer whose humanity still burns bright

The art of political persuasion.

Christina Pazzanese

Harvard Staff Writer

New research says ‘cognitive dissonance’ helps to ingrain political attitudes

Persuading people to support a particular candidate or party is an essential test of any political campaign. But precisely how to move voters successfully is a matter still not fully understood — and the raison d’etre for political strategists and pundits.

In the fields of economics and political science, conventional wisdom has long held that people generally will act in ways that support their fundamental views and preferences. So, for example, while few observers would be surprised if a lifelong Democrat cast a vote for Hillary Clinton in the 2016 presidential election, they might not expect a Republican to go against his or her own party affiliation and vote for her.

The idea behind the “rational actor” theory ― that people seek to act in their own self-interest ― sounds perfectly logical. But it fails to explain what causes some voters to change their political views or preferences over time.

Now, political scientists at Harvard and Stanford universities, drawing from longstanding social psychology research, have concluded that a person’s political attitudes are actually a consequence of the actions he or she has taken — and not their cause.

In a new working paper , the researchers say changing political attitudes can be understood in the context of “cognitive dissonance,” a theory of behavioral psychology that asserts that people experience uneasiness after acting in a way that appears to conflict with their beliefs and preferences about themselves or others. To minimize that mental discomfort, the theory posits, a person will adapt his or her attitude to better fit with or justify previous actions.

“There’s a whole host of things going on in social psychology, psychology, and behavioral economics about how humans act and how preferences are formed” that can shed more light on “why politics is the way it is,” said Matthew Blackwell , an assistant professor of government in the Harvard Faculty of Arts and Sciences (FAS) who co-authored the paper with Maya Sen , an assistant professor of public policy at Harvard Kennedy School (HKS), and Avidit Acharya , an assistant professor of political science at Stanford.

The paper offers a new framework for understanding the origin of political attitudes and preferences and how they may change over time, and presents a formal theory about how people adjust their political preferences in order to downplay cognitive dissonance, a theory that has predictive power.

“I think this gives us a lot of insights into how people’s political attitudes come to be formed, and specifically how they change over time,” said Blackwell. “The more we think about these different mechanisms in people’s heads, I think the better we’re going to be able to … figure out what messages are going to work and what strategies are not going to work.”

Blackwell says the findings offer the first formal theory of political attitude change framed within the context of cognitive dissonance, one that could offer new understanding across a range of political behaviors and help answer questions like what causes political partisanship, what drives ethnic and racial animosity, and how empathy with key social ties is so effective in shifting a person’s political views.

The paper was inspired in part by prior research and a forthcoming book project, which examines the long-term impact of slavery on political attitudes in the American South and why white people who live in areas historically active during slavery still hold very conservative and hostile views on race more than 150 years after slavery ended.

In today’s political world, the desire to reconcile cognitive dissonance drives the growing tendency of political candidates to emphasize apolitical qualities such as personality and demeanor while deliberately cultivating vagueness about their policy positions in an effort to minimize cognitive dissonance in voters’ eyes, said Blackwell.

“The less they know about your policies, the less strife they’ll feel in voting for you if they disagree with you,” he said.

The research also suggests that if political parties can get young people to vote for their candidates at an early age, that could “lock in benefits” over the long term. “What we know is that just the act of voting for a candidate seems to increase your affiliation toward that political party over time and makes you a more habitual voter over time,” said Blackwell.

As for the upcoming 2016 presidential race, cognitive dissonance predicts that parties that have a very combative primary season, like the one expected to take place among a vast Republican field, are weakened going into a general election, “not necessarily because of the ‘beleaguered candidate’ or ‘tired candidate’ that we sometimes hear about, but more because there’s a large group of voters who have to reconcile the fact they really vigorously opposed a [primary] candidate and now are being asked to vote for that candidate,” he said. “You have to engage with that cognitive dissonance about whether or not that’s actually a thing you would be able to do.” The big danger for a party is that voters who can’t reconcile their previous support for different candidate might simply sit out the general election.

“This is why you see so much intense management in primary season of endorsements from candidates who dropped out and a lot of rallying the party around a candidate … to make sure that everyone’s on the same page,” said Blackwell. “The longer these primaries go, it could be the case that the more entrenched people’s attitudes become, and it’s harder to dislodge those.”

Share this article

You might like.

Past is present at Warren Center symposium featuring scholars from Harvard, Emory, UConn, and University of Cambridge

Former House speaker also says Trump would likely win if election were held today in wide-ranging talk

Seminar foregrounds Harlow Shapley, who helped scholars escape Nazi rule

Harvard announces return to required testing

Leading researchers cite strong evidence that testing expands opportunity

Yes, it’s exciting. Just don’t look at the sun.

Lab, telescope specialist details Harvard eclipse-viewing party, offers safety tips

For all the other Willie Jacks

‘Reservation Dogs’ star Paulina Alexis offers behind-the-scenes glimpse of hit show, details value of Native representation

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• My Account Login
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• Open access
• Published: 11 December 2023

The art of rhetoric: persuasive strategies in Biden’s inauguration speech: a critical discourse analysis

• Nisreen N. Al-Khawaldeh 1 ,
• Luqman M. Rababah   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-3871-3853 2 ,
• Ali F. Khawaldeh 1 &
• Alaeddin A. Banikalef 2  

Humanities and Social Sciences Communications volume  10 , Article number:  936 ( 2023 ) Cite this article

3463 Accesses

1 Altmetric

Metrics details

• Language and linguistics

This research investigated the main linguistic strategies used in President Biden’s inauguration speech presented in 2021. Data were analyzed in light of Fairclough’s CDA framework: macro-structure (thematic)—intertextually; microstructure in syntax analysis (cohesion); stylistic (lexicon choice to display the speaker’s emphasis); and rhetoric in terms of persuasive function. The thematic analysis of the data revealed that Biden used certain persuasive strategies including creativity, metaphor, contrast, indirectness, reference, and intertextuality, for addressing critical issues. Creative expressions were drawn highlighting and magnifying significant real-life issues. Certain concepts and values (i.e., unity, democracy, and racial justice) were also accentuated as significant elements of America’s status and Biden’s ideology. Intertextuality was employed by resorting to an extract from one of the American presidents in order to convince the Americans and the international community of his ideas, vision, and policy. It appeared that indirect expressions were also used for discussing politically sensitive issues to acquire a political and interactional advantage over his political opponents. His referencing style showed his interest in others and their unity. Significant ideologies encompassing unity, equality, and freedom for US citizens were stated implicitly and explicitly. The study concludes that the effective use of linguistic and rhetorical devices is important to construct meanings in the world, be persuasive, and convey the intended vision and underlying ideologies.

Similar content being viewed by others

A multi-dimensional analysis of interpreted and non-interpreted English discourses at Chinese and American government press conferences

Dandan Sheng & Xin Li

Representations of 5G in the Chinese and British press: a corpus-assisted critical discourse analysis

Jiamin Pei & Le Cheng

No more binaries: a case of Pakistan as an anomalistic discourse in American print media (2001–2010)

Tauseef Javed, Jiandang Sun & Ayisha Khurshid

Introduction

The significance of language in political and academic realms has gained prominence in recent times (Iqbal et al., 2020 ; Kozlovskaya, et al., 2020 ; Moody & Eslami, 2020 ). Language serves as a potent instrument in politics, embodying a crucial role in the struggle for power to uphold and enact specific beliefs and interests. Undeniably, language encompasses elements that unveil diverse intended meanings conveyed through political speeches, influencing, planning, accompanying, and managing every political endeavor. Effectiveness in political speeches relies on meeting criteria such as credibility, logic, and emotional appeal (Nikitina, 2011 ). Credibility is attained through possessing a particular amount of authority and understanding of the selected issue. Logical coherence is evident when the speech is clear and makes sense to the audience. In addition, establishing an emotional connection with the audience is essential to capture and maintain their attention.

Political speech, a renowned genre of discourse, reveals a lot about how power is distributed, exerted, and perceived in a country. Speech is a powerful tool for shaping the political thinking and political “mind” of a nation, allowing the actors and recipients of political activity to acquire a certain political vision (Fairclough, 1989 ). Political scientists are primarily interested in the historical implications of political decisions and acts, and they are interested in the political realities that are formed in and via discourse (Schmidt, 2008 ; Pierson & Skocpol, 2002 ). Linguists, on the other hand, have long been fascinated by language patterns employed to deliver politically relevant messages to certain locations in order to accomplish a specific goal.

Critical discourse analysis (CDA) is a crucial approach for analyzing language in depth so as to reveal certain tendencies within political discourse (Janks, 1997 ). CDA is not the same as other types of discourse analysis. That is why it is said to be “critical.” According to Cameron ( 2001 ), “critical refers to a way of understanding the social world drawn from critical theory” (p. 121). Fairclough ( 1995 ) also says, “Critical implies showing connections and causes which are hidden; it also implies intervention, for example, providing resources for those who may be disadvantaged through change” (p. 9). In short, it can be applied to both talk and text delivered by leaders or politicians who normally have a lot of authority to reveal their hidden agenda (Cameron, 2001 ) and decipher the meaning of the crucial concealed ideas (Fairclough, 1989 ). Therefore, it is a useful technique for analyzing texts like speeches connected with power, conflict, and politics, such as Martin Luther King’s speech (Alfayes, 2009 ). Fairclough concludes that CDA can elucidate the hidden meaning of “I Have a Dream,” the speech that has a strong and profound significance and whose messages concerning black Americans’ poverty and struggle have inspired many people all around the world. The ideological components are enshrined in political speeches since “ideology invests language in various ways at various levels and that ideology is both properties of structures and events” (Fairclough, 1995 , p. 71). Thus, meanings are produced through attainable interpretations of the target speech.

CDA has obtained wide prominence in analyzing language usage beyond word and sentence levels (Almahasees & Mahmoud, 2022 ). CDA, also known as critical language study (Fairclough, 1989 ) or critical linguistics (Fairclough, 1995 ; Chouliaraki & Fairclough, 1999 ), considers language to be a critical component of social and cultural processes (Fairclough, 1992 ; Fairclough, 1995 ; Chouliaraki & Fairclough, 1999 ). The goal of this strategy, according to Fairclough ( 1989 ), is to “contribute to the broad raising of consciousness of exploitative social connections by focusing on language” (p. 4). He also claims that CDA is concerned with studying linkages within language between dominance, discrimination, power, and control (Fairclough, 1992 ; Fairclough, 1995 ) and that the goal of CDA is to link between discourse practice and social practice obvious (Fairclough, 1995 ). The CDA is a type of critical thinking which means, according to Beyer ( 1995 ), “developing reasoned conclusions.” Thus, it might be viewed as a critical perspective and interpretation that focuses on social issues, notably the role of discourse in the production and reproduction of power abuse or dominance (Wodak & Meyer, 2009 ). Furthermore, the ‘Sapir–Whorf hypothesis’ indicates that the goal of critical discourse interpretation is to retrieve the social meanings conveyed in the speech by analyzing language structures considering their interactive and larger social contexts (Fairclough, 1992 ; Kriyantono, 2019 ; Lauwren, 2020 ).

Political communication is generally classified as a persuasive speech since it aims to influence or convince people that they have made the right choice (Nusartlert, 2017 ). Persuasive discourse is a very powerful tool for getting what is needed or intended. In such a type of discourse, people use communicative strategies to convince or urge specific thoughts, actions, and attitudes. Scheidel defines persuasion as “the activity in which the speaker and the listener are conjoined and in which the speaker consciously attempts to influence the behavior of the listener by transmitting audible, visible and symbolic” ( 1967 , p. 1). Thus, persuasive language is used to fulfill various reasons, among which is convincing people to accept a specific standpoint or idea.

Political speeches are considered eloquent pieces of communication oriented toward persuading the target audience (Haider, 2016 ). Politicians often use many persuasive techniques to express their agendas in refined language in order to convince people of their views on certain issues, gain support from the public, and ultimately achieve the envisioned goals (Fairclough, 1992 ). Leaders who control uncertainty, build allies, and generate supportive resources can easily gain enough leverage to lead. This means that their usage of language aims to put their intended political, economic, and social acts into practice. The inaugural speech is a very political discourse to analyze because it marks the inception of the new presidency, mainly focusing on infusing unity among people. In light of the scarcity of research on this significant speech, this study aims to investigate the main linguistic persuasive strategies used in President Biden’s inauguration speech presented in 2021.

Literature review

Political speeches are a significant genre within the realm of political discourse in which politicians use language intentionally to steer people’s mindsets and emotions in order to achieve a specific outcome. Since politics is mainly based on a constant struggle for power among concerned individuals or parties, persuasive techniques are crucial elements politicians use to manipulate others or make them accept their entrenched ideas and plans. Persuasion involves using rhetoric to convince the target audience to embrace certain ideologies, adopt specific attitudes, and control their behavior toward a particular issue (Van Dijk, 2015 ). The inaugural speeches are quite diplomatic and rhetorical, as they constitute a golden chance for the leaders to assert their leadership style. Thus, they are open to different types of interpretations and form a copious source of data for politicians and linguists. The linguistic choices politicians make are rational because of the underlying ideologies that determine the way their speeches should be structured. Considering this idea, it is vital to study the rhetoric of the American presidential inaugural speech since it was presented at a time full of critical political events and scenarios by a very influential political figure in the world, marking the inception of a new phase in the lives of Americans and the world. The significance of studying such a piece of discourse lies in the messages that the new president seeks to deliver to the American nation and the world at large.

Biden’s speeches have attracted researchers’ attention. For example, Renaldo & Arifin ( 2021 ) examined Biden’s ideology evident in his inaugural speech. The analysis of the data revealed three types of presuppositions manifested in his speech, i.e., lexical, existential, and factive, where lexical presupposition is the most frequent one. The underlying ideology was demonstrated in issues regarding immigrants, healthcare, racism, democracy, and climate change.

Prasetio and Prawesti ( 2021 ) analyzed the underlying meanings based on word counts considering three subcategories: hostility, use of auxiliaries, and noun-pronoun discourse analysis. The results revealed Biden’s hope of helping Americans by overcoming problems, developing many fields, and enhancing different aspects. It was evident that his underlying ideology was liberalism and his cherished values were democracy and unity.

Pramadya and Rahmanhadi ( 2021 ) studied the way Biden employed the rhetoric of political language in his inauguration speech in order to show his plans and political views. Each political message conveyed in his inauguration speech revealed his ideology and power. Sociocultural practices that supported the text were explored to view the inherent reality that gave rise to the discourse.

Amir ( 2021 ) investigated Biden’s persuasive strategies and the covert ideology manifested in his inaugural speech. Numerous components including “the rule of three,” the past references, the biblical examples, etc., were analyzed. The results emphasized the strength of America’s heroic past, which requires that Americans mainly focus on American values of tolerance, unity, and love.

Bani-Khaled and Azzam ( 2021 ) examined the linguistic devices used to convey the theme of unity in President Joe Biden’s Inauguration Speech. The qualitative analysis of this theme showed that the speaker used suitable linguistic features to clarify the concept of unity. It revealed that the tone of the speech appeared confident, reconciliatory, and optimistic. Both religion and history were resorted to as sources of rhetorical and persuasive devices.

The review of the literature shows a bi-directional relationship between language and sociocultural practices. Each one of them exerts an influence on the other. Therefore, CDA explores both the socially shaped and constitutive sides of language usage since language is viewed as “social identity, social relations, and systems of knowledge and belief” (Fairclough, 1993 , p. 134). It shows invisible connections and interventions (Fairclough, 1992 ). Consequently, it is significant to disclose such unobserved meanings and intentions to listeners who may not be aware of them.

Despite the plethora of critical discourse analysis research on political speeches, few studies were conducted on Biden’s inauguration speech. Thus, this study aims to enrich the existing research by complementing the analysis and highlighting some other significant aspects of Biden’s inauguration speech. Therefore, it is expected that this study will enrich critical discourse analysis research by focusing mainly on political speech. It can be a helpful source for teachers studying and teaching languages. They will learn how to properly analyze discourses by following a critical thinking approach to fully comprehend the relationship linking individual parts of discourses and creating meaning. Besides, the study casts light on distinctive features of societies manifested in political speech.

Methodology

The present study analyses President Biden’s inauguration speech (Biden, 2021 ). Data were analyzed in light of the CDA framework: macro-structure (thematic)—intertextually; microstructure in syntax analysis (cohesion); stylistic (lexicon choice to display the speaker’s emphasis); and rhetoric in terms of persuasive function. Fairclough’s discourse analysis approach was adopted to analyze the target speech in terms of text analysis, discursive practices, and social practices. The main token and the frequency of the recurring words were statistically analyzed, whereas the persuasive strategies proposed by Obeng ( 1997 ) were analyzed based on Fairclough’s ( 1992 ) CDA mentioned above.

Results and discussion

In the United States, presidents deliver inaugural speeches after taking the presidential oath of office. Presidents use this occasion to address the public and lay forth their vision and objectives. These speeches can also help to unify the United States, especially after difficult times or conflicts. Millions of people in the United States, as well as millions of people throughout the world, listen to the inaugural speeches to gain a glimpse of the new president’s vision for the world. This speech is particularly intriguing to analyze using the CDA framework in many aspects. Fairclough ( 1992 ) emphasizes that language must be regarded as an instrument of power as well as a tool of communication. Actually, there is a technique for utilizing language that seeks to encourage individuals who are engaged to do particular things.

The analysis of the ideological aspect of Biden’s inaugural speech endeavors to link this speech with certain social processes and to decode his invisible ideology. From the opening lines, it is apparent that Biden’s ideology is based on inclusiveness and a citizen-based position. At the beginning of his speech, he uses the first few minutes of his inaugural speech to thank and address his predecessors and audience as ‘my fellow Americans,’ lumping all sorts of nationalities and ethnicities together as one nation.

Biden then continues to mark a successful and smooth transition of power with an emphasis on a citizen-based attitude. He underlines that the victory belongs not only to him but to all Americans who have spoken up for a better life in the United States, saying “We celebrate the triumph not of a candidate, but of a cause. The cause of democracy. The people, the will of the people has been heard and the will of the people has been heeded.” With this victory, he promised to take his position seriously to unify America as a whole, regardless of its diversity by eliminating discrimination and reuniting the country’s divided territories in order to rebuild fresh faith among Americans. People of all races, ethnicities, sexual orientations, faiths, and origins should be treated equally. There is no difference between red and blue states except for the United States. Through this technique, he tries to accentuate that the whole American system depends on grassroots diplomacy, rather than an exclusive system of presidency. The beginning and the end of his speech successfully emphasize the importance of the oath that he took on himself to serve his nation without bias where he begins with “I have just taken a sacred oath each of those patriots took” and reminds the audience of the holiness of this oath at the end of his speech; as he says “ I close today where I began, with a sacred oath ”.

This section is divided into seven parts. Each of these parts analyses the speech in light of the selected persuasive strategies, which are creativity, indirectness, intertextuality, choice of lexis, coherence, modality, and reference. These strategies were selected among others due to their knock-on effect on explicating the core ideas of the speech.

Creativity is an essential part of any successful political speech. That is because it plays a significant role in structuring the facts the speaker wants to convey in a way that is accessible to the audience. It helps political figures persuade the public of their ideas, initiatives, and agendas. Indeed, Biden’s speech abounds with examples of creativity which in turn shapes the policies and expectations he adopts.

By using the expression “ violence sought to shake the Capitol’s very foundation ”. The speaker alluded with some subtlety and shrewdness to the riots made by a pro-Trump crowd that assaulted the US Capitol on Jan. 6 in an attempt to prevent the formal certification of the Electoral College results. Hundreds of fanatics walked onto the same platform where Biden had taken his oath of office, they offended the democracy and prestige of the place and the US reputation. He left unsaid that they were sent to the Capitol by the previous president, and described them in another part of his speech:

Here we stand, just days after a riotous mob thought they could use violence to silence the will of the people, to stop the work of our democracy, and to drive us from this sacred ground.

Biden won the popular vote by a combined (7) million votes and the Electoral College. The election results were frequently confirmed in courts as being free of fraud. Nevertheless, the rioters who attacked the Capitol claimed differently and never completely admitted these results.

The other thing that stood out was Biden’s emphasis on racism. He highlighted the Declaration of Independence’s goals, as he often does, and depicted them as being at odds with reality:

I know the forces that divide us are deep and they are real. But I also know they are not new. Our history has been a constant struggle between the American ideal that we are all created equal and the harsh, ugly reality that racism, nativism, fear, demonization have long torn us apart.

Of all, this isn’t the first time a president has spoken about racism at an inauguration. However, in the backdrop of the (Black Lives Matter) riots and the continued attack on voting rights, Biden’s adoption of that phrase as his own is both strategically and ethically significant. The pursuit of racial justice has previously been mentioned by Biden as a significant government aim. To lend substance to his rhetoric, society will have to take action on criminal justice reform and voting rights.

President Biden also argued that there has been great progress in women’s rights.

Here we stand, where 108 years ago at another inaugural, thousands of protesters tried to block brave women marching for the right to vote. Today we mark the swearing-in of the first woman in American history elected to national office—Vice President Kamala Harris.

In 1913, a huge number of women marched for the right to vote in a massive suffrage parade on the eve of President-elect Woodrow Wilson’s inauguration, but the next day crowds of mostly men poured into the street for the following day’s inauguration, making it almost impossible for the marchers to get through. Many women heard ‘indecent epithets’ and ‘barnyard banter,’ and they were jeered, tripped, groped, and shoved. But now the big difference has been achieved. During his primary campaign, Biden promised to make history with his running mate selection, claiming he would exclusively consider women. He followed through on that commitment by choosing a lawmaker from one of the most ardent supporters of his campaign, black women, as well as the fastest-growing minority group in the country, Asian Americans.

On a related note, the president touched on the issue of racism, xenophobia, nativism, and other forms of intolerance in the United States “ And now, a rise in political extremism, white supremacy, domestic terrorism that we must confront and we will defeat .” He stressed that every human being has inherent dignity and deserves to be treated with fairness. That is why, on his first day in office, he signed an order establishing a whole-government approach to equity and racial justice. Biden’s administration talks of “restoring humanity” to the US immigration system and considering immigrants as valuable community members and employees. At the same time, Biden is signaling that the previous administration’s belligerent attitude toward partners is over, that the US’s image has plummeted to new lows, and that America can once again be trusted to uphold its commitments in a clear attempt to heal the rift in America’s foreign relations and rebuild alliances with the rest of the world.

So here is my message to those beyond our borders: America has been tested and we have come out stronger for it. We will repair our alliances and engage with the world once again.

Indirectness

Politicians avoid being obvious and speak indirectly while discussing politically sensitive issues in order to protect and advance their careers as well as acquire a political and interactional advantage over their political opponents. It’s also possible that the indirectness is driven by courtesy. Evasion, circumlocution, innuendoes, metaphors, and other forms of oblique communication can be used to convey this obliqueness. Indirectness is closely connected with politeness as it serves politicians’ agendas by spreading awful stories about their opponents (Van Dijk, 2011 ).

Many presidents have been more inclined to draw comparisons between their policies and those of their predecessors. Therefore, Biden was so adamant about avoiding focusing on the previous president that he didn’t criticize or blame the Trump administration’s shortcomings on the epidemic or anything else. In other words, he does not want to offend Republicans, Trump’s party. When Biden was talking about the attack on the US Capitol by the supporters of Trump, he didn’t mention that Trump had sent them. He talked about the lies of Trump and his followers without naming them, but the idea was clear.

There is truth and there are lies. Lies told for power and for profit” he declared. “Each of us has a duty and responsibility, as citizens, as Americans, and especially as leaders—leaders who have pledged to honor our Constitution and protect our nation—to defend the truth and to defeat the lies.

Of course, such lies were spread not merely by Trump and his horde, but also by the majority of Republicans in Congress, who relentlessly promoted the myth that Trump had won the election. One of the most striking aspects of Biden’s speech is this: while appealing for unity, he admitted that some of his opponents aren’t on the same page as him and that their influence has to be addressed. Biden didn’t use his speech to criticize those who believe his victory was skewed, but he appeared to acknowledge that his plan would be tough to implement without tackling the spread of lies. It was an interesting choice for a man who promotes compromise.

Biden’s speech is enriched with numerous conceptual metaphors and metonymies stemming from various domains. Metaphor is perceived as an effective pervasive technique used frequently in our daily communication (Lakoff and Johnson, 1980 ; Van Dijk, 2006 ). It helps the addressees understand and experience one thing in terms of another. It is closely related to cognition as it affects people’s reasoning and giving opinions and judgments (Thibodeau and Boroditsky, 2011 ). For example, Biden used the metaphor ‘Lower the temperature’ to lessen the tension and chaos caused in the previous presidential period. In another example, he utilized ‘ Politics need not be a raging fire ’ to portray politics as something dangerous and might destroy others.

Biden presents examples of metonymy when he portrays periods of troubles, setbacks, and difficult times as dark winter ‘We will need all our strength to persevere through this dark winter’ to emphasize the gloomy days Americans experience in times of crises and wars. The representation of the concept of ‘unity as the path forward’ implicitly alludes to Biden’s path for the previously created divided America, emphasizing the significance of following and securing the necessary solution, which is unity as the path for moving forward. The depiction of crises facing Americans such as ‘ Anger, resentment, hatred. Extremism, lawlessness, violence, Disease, joblessness, hopelessness’ as foes, make people feel the urgent need to unite in order to combat these foes. The expression of ‘ ugly reality ’ reflects an atrocious world full of problems such as racism, nativism, fear, and demonetization . Integrating such conceptual metaphors and metonymy is conventional and deeply rooted and can lead to promoting ideologies by presenting critical political issues in a specific way (Charteris-Black, 2018 ). They make the speech more persuasive as they facilitate people’s understanding of abstract and intricate ideas through using concrete experienceable objects (Lakoff & Johnson, 1980 ). In other words, they perfectly and politely portray serious issues confronting Americans as well as the course of action required to overcome them. Democracy is depicted as both a precious and fragile object. This metonymy makes people appreciate the value of democracy and encourages them to cherish and protect it. Biden declares that democracy, which has been torn during the previous period, has triumphed over threats. Using this metonymy succeeded in connecting logos with pathos, which is one of the goals of using metaphors in political speeches (Mio, 1997 ).

The metonymy of America as a symbol of good things ‘ An American story of decency and dignity. Of love and of healing. Of greatness and of goodness ’ is deliberately created to represent America as an honest and good country. Through this metaphor, Biden appeals not only to the emotions of all people but also to their minds to persuade them that America has been a source of goodness. This finding supports the researchers’ outcomes (Van Dijk, 2006 ; Charteris-Black, 2011 ; Boussaid, 2022 ) that figurative language reveals how important issues are framed in order to advocate specific ideologies by appealing to people’s emotions. Hence, it is a crucial persuasive technique used in political speeches. This implies that Biden is aware of the significance of metaphor as a persuasive rhetoric component.

Intertextuality

Intertextuality has been defined as “the presence of a text in another text” (Genette, 1983 ). Fairclough claims that all texts are intertextual by their very nature and that they are thus constituents of other texts (Fairclough, 1992 ). It is an indispensable strategic feature politicians employ in their speeches to enhance the strength of the speech and reinforce religious, sociocultural, and historical contexts (Kitaeva & Ozerova, 2019 ). Antecedent texts and names are significant components of rhetoric in politics, especially in presidential speeches, because any leader of a country must follow historical, state, moral, and ethical traditions and conventions; referring to precedent texts is one way to get familiar with them. This linguistic phenomenon is necessary for reaching an accurate interpretation of the text, conveying the intended message (Kitaeva & Ozerova, 2019 ), and increasing the credibility of the text, thus getting the audience’s attention to believe in the speaker’s words (Obeng, 1997 ).

Presidents and political intellectuals in the United States have made plenty of statements that will be remembered for years to come. These previous utterances have been unchangeably repeated by other presidents of the USA in different situations throughout American history and are familiar to all Americans. Presidents of the United States frequently quote their predecessors. Former US presidents are frequently mentioned in the corpus of intertextual instances. The oath taken by all presidents—a set rhetorical act of speech—contains a lot of intertextuality. On a macro-structure level, the speaker utilizes intertextuality to give the general theme an appearance by recalling ‘old’ information. Biden quoted Psalm 30:5: “ Weeping may endure for the night, but joy cometh in the morning .” It is a verse that has great resonance for him, given the loss of his wife and daughter in a car accident and his adult son Beau to cancer. On this occasion, he links it to the suffering, with more than 400,000 Americans having died from COVID-19. This biblical and religious type of intertextuality implies that Biden links people’s intimate connection to God with their social and ethical responsibilities.

Another example is when Biden refers to a saying of President Abraham Lincoln in 1863: “ If my name ever goes down into history, it will be for this act and my whole soul is in it .” Although he leads at a completely different time, much like President Lincoln, Biden is grappling with the challenge of a deeply divided country. Deep political schisms have existed in the United States for a long time, but tensions seem to have been exacerbated lately. These nods to Lincoln bring an element of familiarity back to US politics and, potentially, a sense of return to stability after years of turbulence. The president has also quoted a part of the American Anthem Lyrics. He has recited a few lines of the song that highlight his values of hard work, religious faith, and concern for the nation’s future.

The work and prayers of century have brought us to this day. What shall be our legacy? What will our children say… Let me know in my heart When my days are through America, America I gave my best to you.

Choice of lexis

This choice of lexis may have an impact on the way the listeners think and believe what the speaker says. As Aman ( 2005 ) argues, the use of certain words shows the seriousness of the speech to convince people. Regarding this choice of vocabulary, Denham and Roy ( 2005 ) argue that “the vocabulary provides valuable insight into those words which surround or support a concept” (p. 188).

When you review the entire speech of President Biden, one key theme stands out above all others: Democracy. This was reiterated early in his speech and was repeated several times throughout. He has picked the most under-assaulted ideal: ‘democracy’. This word was used (11) times “We’ve learned again that democracy is precious. Democracy is fragile. And at this hour, my friends, democracy has prevailed,” Biden remarked. This would be evident in another period, but after the 2020 election and the attempt to reverse it, the concept is profound.

The president made lots of appeals to unity in his inaugural speech and ignored the partisan conflicts to achieve the supreme goal of enhancing cooperation between all to serve their country. He repeated the words ‘unity’ and ‘uniting’ (11) times.

And we must meet this moment as the United States of America. If we do that, I guarantee you, we will not fail. We have never, ever, ever, failed in America when we have acted together.

This was Biden’s most forceful call for unity. It would be difficult to achieve, however, not just because of the Trump-supporting Republican Party, but also because of the historically close balance of power in the House and Senate.

Biden’s pledge to bridge the divide on policy and earn the support of those who did not support him, rather than seeing them primarily as political opponents, was a mainstay of his campaign, and it was a major theme of his acceptance speech. “ I will be a president for all Americans .” He also tried to play down the dispute between the two parties (Republican and Democratic) “ We must end this uncivil war that pits red against blue, rural versus urban, conservative versus liberal .” This is evident by addressing his opponents from the Republican Party.

To all of those who did not support us, let me say this:Hear me out as we move forward. Take a measure of me and my heart. And if you still disagree, so be it That’s democracy.That’s America. The right to dissent peaceably, within the guardrails of our Republic, is perhaps our nation’s greatest strength. Yet hear me clearly: Disagreement must not lead to disunion. And I pledge this to you: I will be a President for all Americans. I will fight as hard for those who did not support me as for those who did.

The use of idiomatic expressions is also evident in the speech; Biden says ‘If we’re willing to stand in the other person’s shoes just for a moment’ when talking about overcoming fear about America’s future through unity. This expression encourages the addresses to empathize with the speakers’ circumstances before passing any judgment.

The analysis of syntax helps the addressees sense more specifically cohesion. Within a text or phrase, cohesion is a grammatical and lexical connection that keeps the text together and provides its meaning. Halliday, Hasan ( 1976 ) state that “a good discourse has to take attention in relation between sentences and keep relevance and harmony between sentences. Discourse is a linguistic unit that is bigger than a sentence. A context in discourse is divided into two types; first is cohesion (grammatical context) and second is coherence (lexical context)”.

This was shown with the most frequent form of cohesion for the grammatical section, which is the reference with 140 pieces of evidence. Biden employed a variety of conjunctions in his speech to make it easier for his audience to understand his oration, such as “and” (97) times, “but” (16) times, and “so” (8) times.

The analysis also shows that Biden has used various examples of cohesive lexical devices, repetitions, synonyms, and contrast in order to accomplish particular ends such as emphasis, inter-connectivity, and appealing for public acceptance and support. All of these devices contribute to the accurate interpretation of the discourse. It is evident that Biden used contrast/juxtaposition as in:

‘There is truth and there are lies’; ‘Not to meet yesterday’s challenges, but today’s and tomorrow’s’; ‘Not of personal interest, but of the public good’; ‘Of unity, not division’; ‘Of light, not darkness’; ‘through storm and strife, in peace and in war’, ‘We must end this uncivil war that pits red against blue, rural versus urban, conservative versus liberal’. ‘open our souls instead of hardening our hearts’; ‘ we shall write an American story of hope’ .

The use of juxtaposition makes the scene vivid and enhances the listener’s flexible thinking meta-cognition by focusing on important details drawing conclusions and reaching an accurate interpretation of communication.

The use of synonyms such as ‘ heeded-heard; indivisible-one nation; battle-war; victory-triumph; manipulated-manufactured; great nation-our nation-the country; repair-restore-heal-build; challenging-difficult; bringing America together-uniting our nation; fight-combat; anger-resentment-hatred; extremism-lawlessness-violence-terrorism ’ is evident in Biden’s speech. This type of figurative language helps in building cohesion in the speech, formulating and clarifying thoughts and ideas, emphasizing and asserting certain notions, and expressing emotions and feelings. The results are in line with other researchers’ (Lee, 2017 ; Bader & Badarneh, 2018 ) finding that political speeches are emotive; politicians can express feelings and attitudes toward certain issues. Lexical cohesion has also been established through repetition. The most repeated words and phrases in Biden’s speech are democracy, nation, unity, people, racial justice, and America. The repetitive usage of these concepts highlights them as the main basic themes of his speech.

The speaker employed deontic and epistemic modality, which implies that he has used every obligation, permission, and probability or possibility in the speech to exhibit his power by displaying commands, truth claims, and announcements. The speaker’s ideology can be revealed by the modality of permission, obligation, and possibility.

The usage of medium certainty “will” is the highest in numbers (30) times, but the use of low certainty “can” (16) times, “may” (5) times, and high certainty “must” (10) times was noticeably present. The usage of medium certainty is mainly represented by the usage of “will” to introduce future policies and present goals and visions. In critical linguistics terms, the use of low modality in a presidential address may reflect a lack of confidence in the abilities or possibilities of achieving a goal or a vision. That is, the usage of low modality gives more space to the “actor” to achieve the “goal”. For example, the usage of “can” in “ we can overcome this deadly virus ” and “ we can deliver social justice ” does not reflect strong belief, confidence, and assurance from the actor’s side to achieve the goals (social justice, overcoming the deadly virus). The usage of modal verbs in Biden’s speech reflects a balanced personality.

In modality, by using “will”, the speaker tries to convince the audience by giving a promise, and he may hope that what he says will be followed up. By using “can”, the speaker is expressing his ability. In cohesion, it is well organized, which means the speaker tries to make his speech easier to follow by everyone by using “additive conjunctions” or “transition phrases” that have the function of “listing in order”. Lastly, the generic structure of the speech is well structured.

The use of pronouns in political speeches reveals rich information about references to self, others, and identity, agency (Van Dijk, 1993 ). Biden has used the first and second pronouns meticulously to express his vision. The most frequent pronoun Biden has used is ‘we’ with a frequency of (89) which helps him establish trust and credibility in the speech, and a close relationship between him and his audience. This frequency implies that they are one united nation. Whereas he has used the pronoun ‘ I ’ with a frequency of (32). Using these types of pronouns allows the speaker to convey his ideas directly to his audience and make his intended message comprehensible. This balanced usage of pronouns reflects Fairclough’s ( 1992 ) notion of discourse as a social practice rather than a linguistic practice. The analysis demonstrates that the most prominent themes emphasized by Biden are ‘democracy and unity’. These themes have also been accentuated by the overall dominance of the pronoun “we,” which reflects Biden’s perception of America as a good society that needs to be united to successfully go through difficult times. Such notions represent his policies.

Political speech is functional and directive in its very nature. Thus, the language of politics in inaugural speeches is a significant and unique event since it affects people’s minds and hearts concerning certain pressing issues. It is a powerful tool that newly elected political leaders use to promote their new leadership ideas and strategic plans in order to convince people and attract their support. The analysis of the speech reveals that Biden’s language is easy and understandable. Biden employed a variety of rhetorical features to express his ideology. These figurative devices and techniques include creativity, indirectness, intertextuality, metaphor, repetition, cohesion, reference, and synonymy to achieve his political ideologies; assuring Americans and the world of his good intentions towards uniting Americans and working collaboratively with other nations to persevere through difficult times.

The overall themes expressed in this speech are the timeless values of unity and democracy. They are the cornerstones and key ideological components of Biden’s speech. This value-based orientation indicates their paramount recurrent semantic-cognitive features. The construction of the meaning of such values lies in the sociocultural and political context of the USA and the whole world in general and America in particular. Biden’s speech includes certain ideals, like "unity" to work together for the nation’s development, "democracy" to exhibit the "democracy" that has recently been assaulted, "equality" to treat all American people equally, and "freedom" to let individuals do whatever they want. Such themes are essential, especially in times of the worst crisis of COVID-19 encountering the world since they help him reassure his nation and the world of some improvements and promise them progress and prosperity in the years to come. To sum up, the results showed that the speaker used appropriate language in addressing the theme of unity. The speaker used religion and history as a source of rhetorical persuasive devices. The overall tone of the speech was confident, reconciliatory, and hopeful. We can say that language is central to meaningful political discourse. So, the relationship between language and politics is a very significant one.

The study examined the main linguistic strategies used in President Biden’s inauguration speech presented in 2021. The analysis has revealed that Biden in this speech intends to show his feelings (attitudes), his goals (reviewing the US administration), and his power to take over the US presidential office. It has also disclosed Biden’s ideological standpoint that is based on the central values of democracy, tolerance, and unity. Biden’s speech includes certain ideals, like "unity" to work together for the nation’s development, "democracy" to exhibit the "democracy" that has recently been assaulted, "equality" to treat all American people equally, and "freedom" to let individuals do whatever they want. To convey the intended ideological political stance, Biden used certain persuasive strategies including creativity, metaphor, contrast, indirectness, reference, and intertextuality for addressing critical issues. Creative expressions were drawn, highlighting and magnifying significant real issues concerning unity, democracy, and racial justice. Intertextuality was employed by resorting to an extract from one of the American presidents in order to convince Americans and the international community of his ideas, vision, and policy. It appeared that indirect expressions were also used for discussing politically sensitive issues in order to acquire a political and interactional advantage over his political opponents. His referencing style shows his interest in others and their unity. The choice of these strategies may have an influence on how the listeners think and believe about what the speaker says. Significant ideologies encompassing unity, equality, and freedom for US citizens were stated implicitly and explicitly. The study concluded that the effective use of linguistic and rhetorical devices is recommended to construct meaning in the world, be persuasive, and convey the intended vision and underlying ideologies.

The study suggests some implications for pedagogy and academic research. Researchers, linguists, and students interested in discourse analysis may find the data useful. The study demonstrates a sort of connection between political scientists, linguistics, and discourse analysts by clarifying distinct issues using different ideas and discourse analysis approaches. It has important ramifications for the efficient use of language to advance certain moral principles such as freedom, equality, and unity. It unravels that studying how language is used in a certain context allows people to disclose or analyze more about how things are said or done, or how they might exist in different ways in other contexts. It also shows that studying political language is crucial because it helps language users understand how a language is used by those who want power, seek to exercise it and maintain it to gain public attention, influence people’s attitudes or behaviors, provide information that people are unaware of, explain one’s attitudes or behavior, or persuade people to take certain actions. Getting students engaged in CDA research such as the current study would help them be more adept at navigating and using rhetorical devices and CDA tactics, as well as considering the underlying ideologies that underlie any written piece. Based on the analysis, it is recommended that more research studies be conducted on persuasive strategies in other political speeches.

Data availability

All data analyzed in this study are included in this published article. They are available at this link: https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2021/01/20/inaugural-address-by-president-joseph-r-biden-jr/ .

Alfayes H (2009) Martin Luther King “I have a dream”: Critical discourse analysis. KSU faculty member websites. Retrieved August 28, 2009, from, http://faculty.ksu.edu.sa/Alfayez.H/Pages/CDAofKing’sspeechIhaveadream.aspx

Almahasees Z, Mahmoud S (2022) Persuasive strategies utilized in the political speeches of King Abdullah II: a critical discourse analysis. Cogent Arts Humanit 9(1):1–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311983.2022.2082016

Article   Google Scholar  

Aman I (2005) Language and power: a critical discourse analysis of the Barisan Nasional’s Manifesto in the 2004 Malaysian General Election1. In: Le T, Short M (eds.). Proceedings of the International Conference on Critical Discourse Analysis: Theory into Research, 15–18 November 2005. Tasmania: University of Tasmania, viewed August 20, 2009, from http://www.educ.utas.edu.au/conference/files/proceedings/full-cda-proceedings.pdf

Amir S (2021) Critical discourse analysis of Jo Biden’s inaugural speech as the 46th US president. Period Soc Sci 1(2):1–13

Google Scholar  

Bader Y, Badarneh S (2018) The use of synonyms in parliamentary speeches in Jordan. AWEJ Transl Liter Stud 2(3):43–67

Bani-Khaled T, Azzam S (2021) The theme of unity in political discourse: the case of President Joe Biden’s inauguration speech on the 20th of January 2021. Arab World Engl J 12(3):36–50. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3952847

Beyer BK (1995) Critical thinking. Phi Delta Kappa Educational Foundation, Bloomington, IN

Biden J (2021) Inaugural address by President Joseph R. Biden, Jr. https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2021/01/20/inaugural-address-by-president-joseph-r-biden-jr/#:~:text=We%20must%20set%20aside%20the,joy%20cometh%20in%20the%20morning.&text=The%20world%20is%20watching%20today,come%20out%20stronger%20for%20it

Boussaid Y (2022) Metaphor-based analysis of Joe Biden’s and George Washington’s inaugural speeches. Int J Engl Linguist 12(3):1–17

Cameron D (2001) Working with spoken discourse. Sage, London

Charteris-Black J (2011) Politicians and rhetoric: the persuasive power of metaphor. Springer

Charteris-Black J (2018) Analysing political speeches: rhetoric, discourse and metaphor. Bloomsbury Publishing

Chouliaraki L, Fairclough N (1999) Discourse in late modernity: rethinking critical discourse analysis. Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh

Denham G, Roy A (2005) A content analysis of three file-selves. In: Le T, Short M (eds.). Proceedings of the International Conference on Critical Discourse Analysis: Theory into Research, 15–18 November 2005. Tasmania: University of Tasmania, viewed August 20, 2009, from http://www.educ.utas.edu.au/conference/Files/proceedings/full-cda-proceedings.pdf

Fairclough N (1989) Language and power. Longman, Harlow

Fairclough N (1992) Discourse and social change. Polity Press, Cambridge

Fairclough N (1993) Critical discourse analysis and the marketization of public discourse: the universities. Discourse Soc 4(2):133–168

Fairclough N (1995) Critical discourse analysis: the critical study of language

Genette G (1983) “Transtextualité”. Magazine Littéraire 192:40–41

Haider AS (2016) A corpus-assisted critical discourse analysis of the representation of Qaddafi in media: evidence from Asharq Al-Awsat and Al-Khaleej newspapers. Int J Linguist Commun 4(2):11–29. https://doi.org/10.15640/ijlc.v4n2a2

Article   MathSciNet   Google Scholar  

Halliday MAK, Hasan R (1976) Cohesion in English (No. 9). Routledge

Iqbal Z, Aslam MZ, Aslam T, Ashraf R, Kashif M, Nasir H (2020) Persuasive power concerning COVID-19 employed by Premier Imran Khan: a socio-political discourse analysis. Register J 13(1):208–230

Janks H (1997) Critical discourse analysis as a research tool. Discourse Stud Cult Polit Educ 18(3):329–342

Kitaeva E, Ozerova O (2019) Intertextuality in political discourse. In: Language, power, and ideology in political writing: Emerging research and opportunities. IGI Global. pp. 143–170

Kozlovskaya NV, Rastyagaev AV, Slozhenikina JV (2020) The creative potential of contemporary Russian political discourse: from new words to new paradigms. Train Lang Cult 4(4):78–90

Kriyantono R (2019) Syntactic analysis on the consistency of Jokowi’s rhetorical strategy as president and presidential candidate. J Appl Stud Lang 3(2):127–139. https://doi.org/10.31940/jasl.v3i2.1419

Lakoff G, Johnson M (1980) Metaphors we live by. University of Chicago, Chicago, IL

Lauwren S (2020) Interpersonal functions in Greta Thunberg’s “civil society for rEUnaissance” speech. J Appl Stud Lang 4(2):294–305. https://doi.org/10.31940/jasl.v4i2.2084

Lee J (2017) “Constructing educational achievement in political discourse: an analysis of Obama’s Interview at the Education National Summit 2012.” Penn GSE Perspect Urban Educ 13:1–4

Mio JS (1997) Metaphor and politics. Metaphor Symbol 12(2):113–133

Moody S, Eslami ZR (2020) Political discourse, code-switching, and ideology. Russ J Linguist 24(2):325–343

Nikitina A (2011) Successful public speaking. Bookboon

Nusartlert A (2017) Political language in Thai and English: findings and implications for society. J Mekong Soc 13(3):57–75

Obeng SG (1997) Language and politics: indirectness in political discourse. 8(1), 49–83. https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926597008001004

Pierson P, Skocpol T (2002) Historical institutionalism in contemporary political science. Polit Sci State Discip 3(1):1–32

Pramadya TP, Rahmanhadi AD (2021) A day of history and hope: a critical discourse analysis of Joe Biden’s Inauguration speech. Rainbow 10(2):1–10

Prasetio A, Prawesti A (2021) Critical discourse analysis in word count of Joe Biden’s inaugural address. Discourse analysis: a compilation articles on discourse and critical discourse analysis, 1:1–12

Renaldo ZA, Arifin Z (2021) Presupposition and ideology: a critical discourse analysis of Joe Biden’s Inaugural Speech. PROJECT (Prof J Engl Educ) 4(3):497–503

Scheidel TM (1967) Persuasive speaking. Scott Foresman, Glenview

Schmidt VA (2008) Discursive institutionalism: The explanatory power of ideas and discourse. Ann Rev Polit Sci-Palo Alto 11:303

Thibodeau PH, Boroditsky L (2011) Metaphors we think with: The role of metaphor in reasoning. PLoS ONE 6(2):e16782

Article   ADS   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Van Dijk TA (1993) Principles of critical discourse analysis. Discourse Soc 4(2):249–283. https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926593004002006

Van Dijk TA (2006) Discourse and manipulation. Discourse Soc 17(3):359–383

Van Dijk TA (2011) Discourse and ideology. In: Van Dijk (ed) Discourse studies: a multidisciplinary introduction. SAGE, London, p 379-407

Van Dijk TA (2015) Critical discourse analysis. In: Tannen D, Hamilton HE, Schiffrin D (eds) The handbook of discourse analysis, 2nd edn. Wiley, London, p 466–485

Wodak R, Meyer M (2009) Critical discourse analysis: History, agenda, theory and methodology. Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis 2:1-33

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of English Language and Literature, Faculty of Arts, The Hashemite University, Zarqa, Jordan

Nisreen N. Al-Khawaldeh & Ali F. Khawaldeh

Department of English Language and Literature, Faculty of Arts and Languages, Jadara University, Irbid, Jordan

Luqman M. Rababah & Alaeddin A. Banikalef

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

The authors contributed equally to this work.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nisreen N. Al-Khawaldeh .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Ethical approval

Ethical approval was not required as the study did not involve human participants.

Informed consent

This article does not contain any studies with human participants performed by any of the authors.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Supplemantry data, rights and permissions.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Al-Khawaldeh, N.N., Rababah, L.M., Khawaldeh, A.F. et al. The art of rhetoric: persuasive strategies in Biden’s inauguration speech: a critical discourse analysis. Humanit Soc Sci Commun 10 , 936 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-023-02450-y

Download citation

Received : 20 August 2023

Accepted : 22 November 2023

Published : 11 December 2023

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-023-02450-y

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

Persuasive Political Communication

• First Online: 19 December 2017

Cite this chapter

• Shannon R. Lane 3 &
• Suzanne Pritzker 4  

82k Accesses

Being able to communicate your message is key in political social work. Here we focus on best practices of persuasive political communication, including tailoring messages and communications to your audience. This chapter includes overall communication skills, such as framing, strategic use of language, and importance of being clear about your “ask”—what you want your target to do, support, or learn. Traditional media topics include definitions and benefits of various types of media, news hooks, selecting faces and visuals for a campaign, creating soundbites, and key terms such as on the record, off the record, and on background. Social media topics include the variety of available social media platforms and audiences, benefits, drawbacks, and communication strategies for each, as well as ways to keep abreast of emerging social media platforms and abilities. Interpersonal communication topics include public speaking, effective writing, and legislative testimony. Readers will develop a message, create media messaging, and practice “staying on message” as a candidate.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Institutional subscriptions

Associated Press. (n.d.). News values and principles . Retrieved from https://www.ap.org/about/our-story/news-values

Center for Community Change. (1997). How to tell and sell your story: A guide to developing effective messages and good stories about your work . Washington, DC: Center for Community Change.

Google Scholar  

Cournoyer, B. (2008). Talking and listening: The basic interpersonal skills. In The social work skills workbook (5th ed., pp. 127–154). Belmont, CA: Thomson Higher Education.

Craig, T., & Shear, M. D. (2006, August 15). Allen quip provokes outrage, apology. The Washington Post .

Dan Choi handcuffs himself to White House in Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell protest. (2010, May 28). Huffington Post . Retrieved from https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/18/dan-choi-handcuffs-himsel_n_504439.html .

Dorfman, L., & Krasnow, I. D. (2014). Public health and media advocacy. Annual Review of Public Health, 35 , 293–306.

Article   Google Scholar  

Dropp, K., & Nyhan, B. (2017). One-third don't know Obamacare and the Affordable Care Act are the same . The Upshot: The New York Times.

Edwards, H. R., & Hoefer, R. (2010). Are social work advocacy groups using web 2.0 effectively? Journal of Policy Practice, 9 , 220–239.

Franklin, D. (1986). Mary Richmond and Jane Addams: From moral certainty to rational inquiry in social work practice. Social Service Review, 60 (4), 504–525.

Greenwood, S., Perrin, A., & Duggan, M. (2016). Social media update 2016 . Pew Research Center.

Guo, C., & Saxton, G. D. (2012). Tweeting social change: How social media are changing nonprofit advocacy. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly .

Hodge, D. R. (2004). Who we are, where we come from, and some of our perceptions: Comparison of social workers and the general population. Social Work, 42 (9), 261–268.

Hoefer, R. (2016). Advocacy practice for social justice (3rd ed.). Chicago, IL: Lyceum Books.

Lavine, D. S. (2002). The necessity of properly identifying your audience and tailoring your arguments to its needs. In Cardinal rules of advocacy: Understanding and mastering fundamental principles of persuasion (pp. 5–30). Cleveland, OH: NITA.

Lens, V. (2005). Advocacy and argumentation in the public arena: A guide for social workers. Social Work, 50 (3), 231–283.

McNutt, J. G., & Menon, G. (2008). The rise of cyberactivism: Implications for the future of advocacy in the human services. Families in Society: The Journal of Contemporary Human Services, 89 (1), 33–38.

National Association of Social Workers. (2017). Code of Ethics of the National Association of Social Workers . Washington, DC: National Association of Social Workers.

Puente, M. (2015, April 8). Why is Kim Kardashian in Armenia? Huffington Post .

Ray, H. B. (2011). Using social media for digital advocacy. In University of Kansas Work Group for community health and development, community tool box . Kansas: University of Kansas. Retrieved from http://ctb.ku.edu/en/table-of-contents/advocacy/direct-action/electronic-advocacy/main .

Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press. (2012). Reporter's recording guide . Arlington, VA: Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press.

Schattner, E. (2015, October 30). Notes from the die-in, a demonstration for metastatic breast cancer. Forbes.com .

Scott, J. T., & Maryman, J. (2016). Using social media as a tool to complement advocacy efforts. Global Journal of Community Psychology Practice, 7 (1S), 1–22.

SPIN Project. (2003). Winning wages: A media kit for successful living wage strategies .

University of Houston Graduate College of Social Work. (n.d.). Austin Legislative Internship Program .

Ura, A. (2017, March 7). “Bathroom bill” testimony runs late into Tuesday evening. Texas Tribune .

Wallack, L., Woodruff, K., Dorfman, L., & Diaz, I. (1999). Thinking like an advocate. In News for a change: An Advocate’s guide to working with the media Thousand Oaks , CA : Sage Publications (pp. 53–69).

Wellstone Action. (n.d.). Tips for direct mail and campaign literature . Retrieved from http://www.wellstone.org/resources/tips-direct-mail-and-campaign-literature

Whitman, A. (2011). Working with the media. In University of Kansas Work Group for community health and development, community tool box . Kansas: University of Kansas. Retrieved from http://ctb.ku.edu/en/table-of-contents/advocacy/media-advocacy/working-with-media/main .

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

School of Social Work, Adelphi University, Garden City, NY, USA

Shannon R. Lane

Graduate College of Social Work, University of Houston, Houston, TX, USA

Suzanne Pritzker

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Lane, S.R., Pritzker, S. (2018). Persuasive Political Communication. In: Political Social Work. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-68588-5_9

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-68588-5_9

Published : 19 December 2017

Publisher Name : Springer, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-319-68587-8

Online ISBN : 978-3-319-68588-5

eBook Packages : Social Sciences Social Sciences (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

Module Five: Monroe’s Motivated Sequence

Persuasive speaking: functions of persuasive speeches.

So far, we have discussed the functions of persuasive speeches—to influence or reinforce—only peripherally as they relate to our working definition. Next, we turn to an in-depth discussion about how persuasive speeches function.

S peeches to C onvince

“AirPollutionSource” by US Environmental Protection Agency. Public domain.

Some persuasive speeches attempt to influence or reinforce particular beliefs, attitudes, or values. In these speeches, called speeches to convince , the speaker seeks to establish agreement about a particular topic. For instance, a climatologist who believes that global warming is caused by human behavior might try to convince an audience of government officials to adopt this belief. She might end her speech by saying, “In recent years, humans have been producing machines that expel CO 2 either in their production, their consumption, or in both. At the same time, the level of CO 2 in the atmosphere increased dramatically. The connection is clear to many of us that humans have caused this damage and that it is up to us to similarly intervene.” Throughout her speech, the scientist would likely recite a number of statistics linking human productivity with global warming in her effort to convince the government officials that both the causes and solutions to the climatic changes were a distinctly human problem.

Speeches to Actuate

Other times, persuasive speeches attempt to influence or reinforce actions. Speeches to actuate are designed to motivate particular behaviors. Think of a time when you found yourself up at 2 a.m. watching infomercials. Someone on the television screen was trying very hard to sell you a $20 spatula that morphed into a spoon with the click of a button. The salesperson described its utility and innovation for your kitchen, and he described why it would be a good purchase for you—after all, how does a busy person like you have time to use two different utensils? “But wait,” he would say, “there’s more!” In case he had not already convinced you that you needed this kitchen tool, he ended his spiel with a final plea—an extra Spoonatula for free. In this infomercial, the salesperson attempted to convince you that you needed to buy the kitchen tool—it will save you time and money. Thus, not only was the commercial an attempt to convince you to change how you felt about spoons and spatulas, but also an effort to incite you to action—to actually purchase the Spoonatula. This illustrates a function of persuasive speeches, to motivate behavior.

• Chapter 16 Functions of Persuasive Speeches. Authored by : Sarah Stone Watt, Ph.D. and Joshua Trey Barnett. Provided by : Pepperdine University, Malibu, CA and Indiana University, Bloomington, IN. Located at : http://publicspeakingproject.org/psvirtualtext.html . Project : The Public Speaking Project. License : CC BY-NC-ND: Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives
• AirPollutionSource. Provided by : US Environmental Protection Agency. Located at : http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:AirPollutionSource.jpg . License : Public Domain: No Known Copyright

Political Speech Writing: How Candidates Can Craft Compelling Messages

Understanding the Power of Political Speeches

Political speeches play a pivotal role in shaping the course of nations and can shape the trajectory of societies. Effective speech writing for elections allows leaders to communicate their vision, values, and policy objectives to the public. These speeches serve as a means of persuasion, providing a platform for leaders to connect with their constituents emotionally. Through carefully tailoring speeches, a political oratory has the potential to inspire, mobilize, and unite people around common goals and ideals.

One key aspect of political speeches is their ability to inform and educate the public. In a democratic society, an informed citizenry is essential for making sound election decisions and understanding government policy implications. A well-done political oratory allows leaders to clarify their positions and present evidence and data. Speechwriting for elections often requires addressing complex issues and helping citizens make informed choices about how they want the country to move. Moreover, political speeches serve as a channel for transparency and accountability.

Beyond their informational role, a well-crafted political oratory fosters unity and social cohesion by containing messages of hope, unity and inclusivity. They can transcend political divides and unite people, transcending differences of opinion and background. In times of crisis or uncertainty, campaign speeches provide reassurance and a sense of purpose. Furthermore, campaign speeches help a nation navigate challenges and emerge stronger.

Well-crafted campaign speeches can be transformative in elections by serving as a dynamic tool for candidates to connect with voters, sway public opinion and ultimately change the outcome of an election. When a candidate speaks passionately about issues that resonate with your audience, it creates a sense of trust and authenticity by tapping into the electorate's hopes, fears, and aspirations.

Speechwriting for elections helps to clarify a candidate's policy positions and goals, providing voters with a clearer understanding of what they stand for, allowing them to set themselves apart from their opponents and creating a sense of confidence in their leadership. A well-crafted political speech can sway undecided voters to the candidate's side.

Rousing persuasive communication can galvanize volunteers and grassroots activists , encouraging them to work harder for the candidate, leading to a higher voter turnout among the candidate's base.

Steps to Effective Political Speechwriting

Here are five tips for crafting an effective political speech:

#1: Make time for research.

Digging deep to find relevant information is crucial when writing a political speech because it adds depth and credibility to the discourse. Great research also ensures that the political speech addresses the complexities of voters' concerns. A speechwriter can write informative and persuasive communication by seeking out comprehensive data.

#2: Consider your audience.

Analyzing a target audience is essential for understanding their demographics, values, beliefs, and concerns. It allows speechwriters to tailor their message to resonate with their intended listeners' specific needs and interests. This analysis enables speechwriters to speak directly to the heart of the issues that matter most to the target audience. It also helps avoid potential pitfalls, such as using language or framing that might alienate or offend specific target audience segments.

#3: Draw on the elements of storytelling.

Storytelling in politics is essential for political speechwriters because it helps engage and persuade the audience effectively. Furthermore, storytelling in politics captures the audience's attention by connecting them emotionally with the message. The right message provides a relatable and human dimension to the content. Furthermore, storytelling in politics helps create a cohesive speech that flows seamlessly, ensuring listeners understand and retain key points. Whether it is rallying support for a candidate, advocating for a policy change, or fostering a sense of unity, a well-crafted narrative can convey a compelling vision for the future and ignite a sense of purpose among the audience.

Free AI tools for your campaign

#4: Set the right tone.

A campaign speech must set the right mood because the emotional tone and atmosphere it creates can significantly impact how the audience receives and responds to the message. By establishing a positive and receptive attitude, the audience is more likely to be engaged and attentive to the speaker's message, which can inspire hope, rally support, and forge meaningful connections. Crafting a political speech that is positive and relatable makes the audience more receptive to the speaker's arguments, so it is a vital political communication strategy. A speech promoting a mood of unity helps to bridge divides, bringing people together.

#5: Edit and practice ahead of time.

Editing and rehearsing a political speech is essential because it ensures the message is clear, concise and free from ambiguity. A well-edited speech enhances the speaker's credibility by demonstrating that the candidate has thoroughly researched and prepared their remarks. Therefore, giving speeches can be a key political communication strategy.

Practicing a speech allows the speaker to fine-tune their delivery and tone to maintain the audience's engagement. Furthermore, practice enables the speaker to reinforce the critical points of the speech, ensuring that they communicate central ideas in an easily memorable way.

Examples of Memorable Political Speeches

Let's turn our attention to some political speechwriting examples. These political speechwriting examples can serve as a powerful guide for candidates.

#1: Abraham Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address

Consider Abraham Lincoln's Gettysburg Address, as it is one of American history's most impactful political speeches. Presented during the Civil War at the dedication of the Soldiers' National Cemetery in Gettysburg, Pennsylvania, the speech was concise, lasting just over two minutes, but its impact was profound. Lincoln eloquently emphasized the principles of equality and liberty and redefined the purpose of the American government as a "government of the people, by the people, for the people." This speech solidified the United States' commitment to democracy and freedom. It also marked a turning point in the Civil War, as it galvanized public sentiment and reinvigorated the Union's resolve to preserve the nation.

#2: Martin Luther King, Jr.’s “I Have a Dream” Speech

Another of the most impactful political speeches was Martin Luther King Jr.'s "I Have a Dream" speech, delivered during the March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom. This political speechwriting example was pivotal in the American civil rights movement. King's eloquent articulation of his dream for a racially integrated and just society resonated deeply with millions. The speech helped mobilize support for civil rights legislation and highlighted the urgent need for racial equality. King's call for nonviolent protest and his vision for a future where individuals would be judged by the content of their character rather than the color of their skin inspired generations of activists. It was crucial in advancing civil rights legislation, culminating in the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

#3: Ronald Reagan’s “Tear Down This Wall” Speech

One of the most impactful political speeches ever given was the one delivered at the Brandenburg Gate in West Berlin, during which President Ronald Reagan issued a powerful challenge to the Soviet Union by demanding, "Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!" The Berlin Wall, which had divided East and West Berlin for decades, symbolized the Cold War's division. This political speechwriting example indicated the West's commitment to freedom and democracy. While the immediate impact of the speech was limited, it contributed to the eventual fall of the Berlin Wall and the end of the Cold War. Reagan's words resonated with people on both sides of the Iron Curtain, serving as a rallying cry for change.

Studying these speeches and tailoring speeches after them and other iconic speeches is a great way to learn public speaking strategies. These American political speeches share the theme of advocating for equality, justice and freedom. They transcended their immediate contexts to become lasting symbols of American ideals and continue inspiring generations of Americans and people worldwide. 

Here are some public speaking strategies to employ based on these inspirational speeches:

Ensure that the central theme of your political campaign communication resonates with the target audience and keep it at the forefront of the speech.

Using metaphors, similes, and emotionally resonant phrases to evoke powerful imagery and emotions in the audience is a critical speech delivery technique that can help your political campaign communications.

Understanding the audience's needs, aspirations, and concerns so that the message connects deeply is a speechwriting best practice you will want to remember.

Incorporating a clear and compelling call to action into the speech is an essential political communication strategy.

Be aware of historical contexts when crafting political persuasions for political campaign communications.

Align messages with the speaker's personality and values.

Employ strategic repetition to emphasize critical political persuasions because it will make them more memorable.

Use speech writing techniques to capture the speaker's authentic voice and beliefs.

Tips for Effective Speech Delivery

Candidates often ask speechwriters to give them speech delivery techniques. They may recommend several public speaking strategies that will help you with effective speech delivery. These include:

Using body gestures and body language to enhance the message's impact is a critical speech delivery technique as it helps convey confidence and credibility so that the audience connects to you better.

Connecting with the audience is paramount because it establishes rapport, fosters voter engagement and ensures the message resonates with the listeners personally. Therefore, it is crucial to remember this idea while focusing on speech delivery techniques as you build your political communication strategy.

Breathing deeply right before giving a speech is a vital speech delivery technique that can help you overcome stage fright as it calms nerves and boosts confidence.

Adapting Your Speech for Different Audiences

Among speech writing best practices is to adapt a speech to different audiences and your audience's demographics. This is essential for ensuring political persuasion as the message is relevant, relatable, and inclusive. Practicing this as you concentrate on other speech writing best practices ensures audience engagement occurs and that they will understand your messaging better.

Another key among speech writing best practices is remembering to be specific during a speech. This is vital as it adds credibility and clarity to the candidate messaging, helping to ensure audience engagement. Therefore, ensure that you use speech writing techniques for persuasive communication that address specific issues and concerns experienced by the audience.

Navigating Ethical Considerations in Political Speechwriting

Honesty is a fundamental pillar of trust and accountability in a democratic society, so when politicians are truthful in their political campaign messaging, they build integrity and foster the public's faith in their leadership. Citizens can make informed decisions when a politician uses truthful political campaign messaging. Therefore, make sure to always practice ethical speech writing.

Ethical speech writing also means avoiding divisive rhetoric because it often deepens existing divisions, polarizes communities, and makes finding common ground on important issues more difficult. Divisive rhetoric hinders constructive dialogue between political opponents. Using speech writing techniques that are inclusive, respectful, and constructive fosters unity, promotes understanding and achieves positive outcomes, which is essential for driving audience engagement in your political campaign messaging.

Leveraging Technology for Speechwriting

Many speech writing resources can help you. Let these speechwriting resources serve as a guide, but do not rely totally on speech writing resources, or you will block out the candidate's personality. Among the most effective speech writing tips is to let speechwriting tools enhance the speech writing process by using them to improve speech writing techniques. Among these speech writing tools, speech writing software is a vital resource that plays a pivotal role in organizing thoughts, structuring arguments, and drafting coherent content while creating political discourse and crafting political messages. Utilizing these effective speech writing tips gives you access to templates, outlines, and organization features that help transform ideas into well-structured political discourses. Even if you usually shy away from technology, try speech writing software.

An easy place to start is Good Party’s AI Campaign Manager , which can help candidates draft launch speeches with ease, saving time and energy. 

Additionally, another favorite among effective speech writing tips is to use research databases. These are invaluable tools for the speech writing process as they allow you to access vast amounts of information, including historical data, statistics, and policy details. Therefore, they are an invaluable speech writing resource, enabling speechwriters to conduct thorough research, fact-check statements, and bolster arguments with credible sources.

Furthermore, grammar and style-checking software is another indispensable software component critical to the speech writing process. This speech writing resource helps to refine language and ensure that the political rhetoric is clear, is grammatically correct, and resonates with the intended audience. These tools help avoid common language pitfalls and enhance the overall quality of the writing.

Another effective speech writing tip is to incorporate digital elements into political discourse, as using them engages a more diverse audience. Integrating visuals, such as infographics and charts, can make complex data more accessible by providing a visual context that aids comprehension. These graphic elements enhance understanding, make the speech more memorable, and help to ensure that crucial candidate messaging resonates with broader demographics.

Speech writing and public relations are intrinsically linked, playing a pivotal role in shaping the perception of individuals. Effective speechmaking in public relations allows for the dissemination of critical messages to target audiences. Through speechwriting and public relations strategies, public figures can build and maintain trust, manage their reputation and foster meaningful connections with voters, underscoring the indispensable synergy between speech writing and public relations in elections.

The Role of Speechwriters in Political Campaigns

Speechwriters often collaborate closely with candidates to help them build political communication skills. These political communication skills include articulating their vision, values and policy positions. Ethical speech writing requires you to lay aside your ideas and write from the candidate's point of view. This effective speech writing tip often begins with in-depth interviews to understand the candidate's personality, goals and key messages. Speechwriters then craft political rhetoric aligning with the candidate's voice and resonating with their intended audience. Regular communication and feedback loops are vital for crafting political messages, allowing for revisions and fine-tuning political communication skills to ensure that inspirational speeches are authentic and compelling. The partnership between speechwriters and candidates when crafting political messages is a dynamic process that must convey the candidate's vision effectively and connect with voters.

However, not all candidates need to hire speechwriters. With Good Party’s AI Campaign Manager , candidates can generate drafts of political speeches, completely for free. Our tools are especially helpful for crafting launch speeches, which candidates can give at campaign launch events and to kick off their campaigns.

Inspirational speeches, meticulously tailored to resonate with diverse audiences and delivered with authenticity, possess the potential to inspire, inform and mobilize voters, encapsulating a candidate's vision and values. Often, the words spoken reverberate in the electorate's hearts and minds. Tailoring speeches in this way gives them the power to shape the outcome of campaigns and the nation's course. Political rhetoric bridges the divide between candidates and voters, uniting diverse communities under a shared vision. Overall, remember that the qualities of a great speech rely on elements of style, elements of substance, and elements of impact.

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

11 Persuasive Speaking

Introduction, 11.1 foundation of persuasion.

Persuasive speaking seeks to influence the beliefs, attitudes, values, or behaviors of audience members. In order to persuade, a speaker has to construct arguments that appeal to audience members (Poggi, 2005). Arguments form around three components: claim, evidence, and warrant.

The claim is the statement that will be supported by evidence. Your thesis statement is the overarching claim for your speech, but you will make other claims within the speech to support the larger thesis (Nordquist, 2020). Evidence , also called grounds, supports the claim (McCroskey, 1969). The main points of your persuasive speech and the supporting material you include serve as evidence. For example, a speaker may make the following claim: “There should be a national law against texting while driving.” The speaker could then support the claim by providing the following evidence: “Research from the US Department of Transportation has found that texting while driving creates a crash risk that is twenty-three times worse than driving while not distracted.” The warrant is the underlying justification that connects the claim and the evidence (McCroskey, 1966). One warrant for the claim and evidence cited in this example is that the U.S. Department of Transportation is an institution that funds research conducted by credible experts. An additional and more implicit warrant is that people should not do things they know are unsafe.

As you put together a persuasive argument, you act as the judge. You can evaluate arguments that you come across in your research by analyzing the connection (the warrant) between the claim and the evidence (McCroskey, 1966). If the warrant is strong, you may want to highlight that argument in your speech. You may also be able to point out a weak warrant in an argument that goes against your position, which you could then include in your speech. Every argument starts by putting together a claim and evidence, but arguments grow to include many interrelated units.

11.2 Adapting Persuasive Messages

Competent speakers should consider their audience throughout the speech-making process. Given that persuasive messages seek to influence directly the audience in some way, audience adaptation becomes even more important (Hamm, 2006).

When you have audience members who already agree with your proposition, you should focus on intensifying their agreement. You can also assume that they have foundational background knowledge of the topic, which means you can take the time to inform them about lesser-known aspects of a topic or cause to reinforce further their agreement. Rather than move these audience members from disagreement to agreement, you can focus on moving them from agreement to action. Remember, calls to action should be as specific as possible to help you capitalize on audience members’ motivation in the moment, so they are more likely to follow through on the action (Hamm, 2006).

There are two main reasons audience members may be neutral about your topic: (1) they are uninformed about the topic or (2) they do not think the topic affects them. In this case, you should focus on instilling a concern for the topic. Uninformed audiences may need background information before they can decide if they agree or disagree with your proposition. If the issue is familiar but audience members are neutral because they do not see how the topic affects them, focus on getting the audience’s attention and demonstrating relevance. Remember that concrete and proxemic supporting materials will help an audience find relevance in a topic. Students who pick narrow or unfamiliar topics will have to work harder to persuade their audience, but neutral audiences often provide the most chance of achieving your speech goal since even a small change may move them into agreement (Williams, 2018).

When audience members disagree with your proposition, you should focus on changing their minds. To persuade effectively, you must be seen as a credible speaker. When an audience is hostile to your proposition, establishing credibility is even more important, as audience members may be quick to discount or discredit someone who does not appear prepared or does not present well-researched and supported information. Do not give an audience a chance to write you off before you even get to share your best evidence. When facing a disagreeable audience, the goal should also be small change. You may not be able to switch someone’s position completely but influencing him or her is still a success. Aside from establishing your credibility, you should also establish common ground with an audience. Acknowledging areas of disagreement and logically refuting counterarguments in your speech is also a way to approach persuading an audience in disagreement, as it shows that you are open-minded enough to engage with other perspectives (Williams, 2018).

11.3 Determining Your Proposition

The proposition of your speech is the overall direction of the content and how that content relates to the speech goal. A persuasive speech will fall primarily into one of three categories: propositions of fact, value, or policy (Mackay, 2012). A speech may have elements of any of the three propositions, but you can usually determine the overall proposition of a speech from the specific purpose and thesis statements.

Propositions of fact focus on beliefs and try to establish that something “is or isn’t.” Propositions of value focus on persuading audience members that something is “good or bad,” “right or wrong,” or “desirable or undesirable.” Propositions of policy advocate that something “should or shouldn’t” be done (Mackay, 2012). Since most persuasive speech topics can be approached as propositions of fact, value, or policy, it is a good idea to start thinking about what kind of proposition you want to make, as it will influence how you go about your research and writing. As you can see in the following example using the topic of global warming, the type of proposition changes the types of supporting materials you would need:

• Proposition of fact. Increased greenhouse gases related to human activity cause global warming.
• Proposition of value. America’s disproportionately large amount of pollution relative to other countries is wrong.
• Proposition of policy. There should be stricter emission restrictions on individual cars.

To support propositions of fact, you would want to present a logical argument based on objective facts that can then be used to build persuasive arguments. Propositions of value may require you to appeal more to your audience’s emotions and cite expert and lay testimony. Persuasive speeches about policy usually require you to research existing and previous laws or procedures and determine if any relevant legislation or propositions are currently being considered (Barton & Tucker, 2021).

11.4 Organizing a Persuasive Speech

We have already discussed several patterns for organizing your speech, but some organization strategies are specific to persuasive speaking. Some persuasive speech topics lend themselves to a topical organization pattern, which breaks the larger topic up into logical divisions. Recency and primacy, as well as adapting a persuasive speech based on the audience’s orientation toward the proposition can be connected when organizing a persuasive speech topically. Primacy means putting your strongest information first. It is based on the idea that audience members put more weight on what they hear first. This strategy can be especially useful when addressing an audience that disagrees with your proposition, as you can try to win them over early. Recency means putting your strongest information last to leave a powerful impression. This can be useful when you are building to a climax in your speech, specifically if you include a call to action (Morrison, 2015).

The problem-solution pattern is an organizational pattern that advocates for a particular approach to solve a problem. You would provide evidence to show that a problem exists and then propose a solution with additional evidence or reasoning to justify the course of action (Macasieb, 2018). One main point addressing the problem and one main point addressing the solution may be sufficient, but you are not limited to two. You could add a main point between the problem and solution that outlines other solutions that have failed. You can also combine the problem-solution pattern with the cause-effect pattern or expand the speech to fit with Monroe’s Motivated Sequence.

The cause-effect pattern can be used for informative speaking when the relationship between the cause and effect is not contested. The pattern is more fitting for persuasive speeches when the relationship between the cause and effect is controversial or unclear. There are several ways to use causes and effects to structure a speech. You could have a two-point speech that argues from cause to effect or from effect to cause. You could also have more than one cause that leads to the same effect or a single cause that leads to multiple effects. The following are some examples of thesis statements that correspond to various organizational patterns. As you can see, the same general topic area, prison overcrowding, is used for each example. This illustrates the importance of considering your organizational options early in the speech-making process, since the pattern you choose will influence your researching and writing.

• Problem-solution. Prison overcrowding is a serious problem that we can solve by finding alternative rehabilitation for nonviolent offenders.
• Problem–failed solution–proposed solution. Prison overcrowding is a serious problem that should not be solved by building more prisons; instead, we should support alternative rehabilitation for nonviolent offenders.
• Cause-effect. Prisons are overcrowded with nonviolent offenders, which leads to lesser sentences for violent criminals.
• Cause-cause-effect. State budgets are being slashed and prisons are overcrowded with nonviolent offenders, which leads to lesser sentences for violent criminals.
• Cause-effect-effect. Prisons are overcrowded with nonviolent offenders, which leads to increased behavioral problems among inmates and lesser sentences for violent criminals.
• Cause-effect-solution. Prisons are overcrowded with nonviolent offenders, which leads to lesser sentences for violent criminals; therefore, we need to find alternative rehabilitation for nonviolent offenders.

Monroe’s motivated sequence is an organizational pattern designed for persuasive speaking that appeals to audience members’ needs and motivates them to action (Watt & Barnett, 2021). If your persuasive speaking goals include a call to action, you may want to consider this organizational pattern. Here is an example of that pattern:

Step 1: Attention

• Hook the audience by making the topic relevant to them.
• Imagine living a full life, retiring, and slipping into your golden years. As you get older, you become more dependent on others and move into an assisted-living facility. Although you think life will be easier, things get worse as you experience abuse and mistreatment from the staff. You report the abuse to a nurse and wait, but nothing happens and the abuse continues. Elder abuse is a common occurrence, and unlike child abuse, there are no laws in our state that mandate complaints of elder abuse be reported or investigated.

Step 2: Need

• Cite evidence to support the fact that the issue needs to be addressed.
• According to the American Psychological Association, one to two million elderly Americans have been abused by their caretakers. In our state, those in the medical, psychiatric, and social work field are required to report suspicion of child abuse but are not mandated to report suspicions of elder abuse.

Step 3: Satisfaction

• Offer a solution and persuade the audience that it is feasible and well thought out.
• There should be a federal law mandating that suspicion of elder abuse be reported and that all claims of elder abuse be investigated.

Step 4: Visualization

• Take the audience beyond your solution and help them visualize the positive results of implementing it or the negative consequences of not.
• Elderly people should not have to live in fear during their golden years. A mandatory reporting law for elderly abuse will help ensure that the voices of our elderly loved ones will be heard.

Step 5: Action

• Call your audience to action by giving them concrete steps to follow to engage in a particular action or to change a thought or behavior.
• I urge you to take action in two ways. First, raise awareness about this issue by talking to your own friends and family. Second, contact your representatives at the state and national level to let them know that elder abuse should be taken seriously and given the same level of importance as other forms of abuse. I brought cards with the contact information for our state and national representatives for this area. Please take one at the end of my speech. A short e-mail or phone call can help end the silence surrounding elder abuse.

11.5 Persuasive Reasoning and Fallacies

Persuasive speakers should be concerned with what strengthens and weakens an argument. Knowing different types of reasoning can help you put claims and evidence together in persuasive ways and help you evaluate the quality of arguments that you encounter. Further, being able to identify common fallacies of reasoning can help you be a more critical consumer of persuasive messages.

Reasoning refers to the process of making sense of things around us. In order to understand our experiences, draw conclusions from information, and present new ideas, we must use reasoning. We often reason without being aware of it, however, becoming more aware of how we think can empower us to be better producers and consumers of communicative messages. The three types of reasoning we will explore are inductive, deductive, and causal.

Inductive Reasoning

Inductive reasoning reaches conclusions through the citation of examples and is the most frequently used form of logical reasoning (Walter, 1966). While introductory speakers are initially attracted to inductive reasoning because it seems easy, it can be difficult to employ well. Inductive reasoning, unlike deductive reasoning, does not result in true or false conclusions. Instead, since conclusions are generalized based on observations or examples, conclusions are “more likely” or “less likely.” Despite the fact that this type of reasoning is not definitive, it can still be valid and persuasive.

Some arguments based on inductive reasoning will be more cogent, or convincing and relevant, than others. For example, inductive reasoning can be weak when claims are made too generally. An argument that fraternities should be abolished from campus because they contribute to underage drinking and do not uphold high academic standards could be countered by providing examples of fraternities that sponsor alcohol education programming for the campus and have members that have excelled academically (Walter, 1966). In this case, one overly general claim is countered by another general claim, and both of them have some merit. It would be more effective to present a series of facts and reasons and then share the conclusion or generalization that you have reached from them.

You can see inductive reasoning used in the following speech excerpt from President George W. Bush’s address to the nation on the evening of September 11, 2001. Notice how he lists a series of events from the day, which builds to his conclusion that the terrorist attacks failed in their attempt to shake the foundation of America.

“Today, our fellow citizens, our way of life, our very freedom came under attack in a series of deliberate and deadly terrorist acts. The victims were in airplanes or in their offices: secretaries, business men and women, military and federal workers, moms and dads, friends, and neighbors. Thousands of lives were suddenly ended by evil, despicable acts of terror. The pictures of airplanes flying into building, fires burning, huge—huge structures collapsing have filled us with disbelief, terrible sadness, and a quiet unyielding anger. These acts of mass murder were intended to frighten our nation into chaos and retreat. But they have failed. Our country is strong. A great people has been moved to defend a great nation. Terrorist attacks can shake the foundations of our biggest buildings, but they cannot touch the foundation of America.”

If a speaker is able to provide examples that are concrete, proxemic, and relevant to the audience, as Bush did in this example, audience members are prompted to think of additional examples that connect to their own lives. Inductive reasoning can be useful when an audience disagrees with your proposition. As you present logically connected examples as evidence that build to a conclusion, the audience may be persuaded by your evidence before they realize that the coming conclusion will counter what they previously thought. This also sets up cognitive dissonance, which is a persuasive strategy we will discuss later.

Reasoning by analogy is a type of inductive reasoning that argues that what is true in one set of circumstances will be true in another (Walter, 1966). Reasoning by analogy has been criticized and questioned by logicians, since two sets of circumstances are never exactly the same. While this is true, our goal when using reasoning by analogy in persuasive speaking is not to create absolutely certain conclusions but to cite cases and supporting evidence that can influence an audience. For example, let’s say you are trying to persuade a university to adopt an alcohol education program by citing the program’s success at other institutions. Since two universities are never exactly the same, the argument cannot be airtight. To better support this argument, you could first show that the program was actually successful using various types of supporting material such as statistics from campus offices and testimony from students and staff. Second, you could show how the cases relate by highlighting similarities in the campus setting, culture, demographics, and previous mission. Since you cannot argue that the schools are similar in all ways, choose to highlight significant similarities. In addition, it is better to acknowledge significant limitations of the analogy and provide additional supporting material to address them than it is to ignore or hide such limitations.

So how do we evaluate inductive reasoning? When inductive reasoning is used to test scientific arguments, there is rigorous testing and high standards that must be met for a conclusion to be considered valid. Inductive reasoning in persuasive speaking is employed differently. A speaker cannot cite every example that exists to build to a conclusion, so to evaluate inductive reasoning you must examine the examples that are cited in ways other than quantity. First, the examples should be sufficient, meaning that enough are cited to support the conclusion. If not, you risk committing the hasty generalization fallacy. A speaker can expect that the audience will be able to think of some examples as well, so there is no set number on how many examples is sufficient. If the audience is familiar with the topic, then fewer examples are probably sufficient, while more may be needed for unfamiliar topics. A speaker can make his or her use of reasoning by example more powerful by showing that the examples correspond to the average case, which may require additional supporting evidence in the form of statistics. Arguing that teacher salaries should be increased by providing an example of a teacher who works side jobs and pays for his or her own school supplies could be effectively supported by showing that this teacher’s salary corresponds to the national average (Walter, 1966).

Second, the examples should be typical, meaning they were not cherry-picked to match the point being argued. A speaker who argues to defund the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) because the organization supports art that is “pornographic and offensive” may cite five examples of grants given for projects that caused such controversy. Failing to mention that these examples were pulled from the more than 128,000 grants issued by the NEA would be an inappropriate use of inductive reasoning since the examples are not sufficient or typical enough to warrant the argument. Another way to support inductive arguments is to show that the examples are a fair sample, meaning they are representative of the larger whole. Arguing that college athletes should not receive scholarships because they do not have the scholastic merit of other students and have less academic achievement could be supported by sharing several examples. However, if those examples were not representative, then they are biased, and the reasoning faulty. A speaker would need to show that the athletes used in the example are representative, in terms of their race, gender, sport, and background, of the population of athletes at the university.

Deductive Reasoning

Deductive reasoning derives specifics from what is already known. It was the preferred form of reasoning used by ancient rhetoricians like Aristotle to make logical arguments (Cooper & Nothstine, 1996).

A syllogism is an example of deductive reasoning that is commonly used when teaching logic. A syllogism is an example of deductive reasoning in which a conclusion is supported by major and minor premises. The conclusion of a valid argument can be deduced from the major and minor premises. A commonly used example of a syllogism is “All humans are mortal. Socrates is a human. Socrates is mortal.” In this case, the conclusion, “Socrates is mortal,” is derived from the major premise, “All humans are mortal,” and the minor premise, “Socrates is a human.” In some cases, the major and minor premises of a syllogism may be taken for granted as true. In the previous example, the major premise is presumed true because we have no knowledge of an immortal person to disprove the statement. The minor premise is presumed true because Socrates looks and acts like other individuals we know to be human. Detectives or scientists using such logic would want to test their conclusion. We could test our conclusion by stabbing Socrates to see if he dies, but since the logic of the syllogism is sound, it may be better to cut Socrates a break and deem the argument valid. Since most arguments are more sophisticated than the previous example, speakers need to support their premises with research and evidence to establish their validity before deducing their conclusion.

A syllogism can lead to incorrect conclusions if one of the premises is not true, as in the following example:

• All presidents have lived in the White House. (Major premise)
• George Washington was president. (Minor premise)
• George Washington lived in the White House. (Conclusion)

In the previous example, the major premise was untrue, since John Adams, our second president, was the first president to live in the White House. This causes the conclusion to be false. A syllogism can also exhibit faulty logic even if the premises are both true but are unrelated, as in the following example:

• Penguins are black and white. (Major premise)
• Some old television shows are black and white. (Minor premise)
• Some penguins are old television shows. (Conclusion)

Causal Reasoning

Causal reasoning argues to establish a relationship between a cause and an effect. When speakers attempt to argue for a particular course of action based on potential positive or negative consequences that may result, they are using causal reasoning. Such reasoning is evident in the following example: Eating more local foods will boost the local economy and make you healthier. The “if/then” relationship that is set up in causal reasoning can be persuasive, but the reasoning is not always sound. Rather than establishing a true cause-effect relationship, speakers more often set up a correlation, which means there is a relationship between two things but there are other contextual influences.

To use causal reasoning effectively and ethically, speakers should avoid claiming a direct relationship between a cause and an effect when such a connection cannot be proven. Instead of arguing “x caused y,” it is more accurate for a speaker to say “x influenced y.” Causal thinking is often used when looking to blame something or someone, as can be seen in the following example: It’s the president’s fault that the economy has not recovered more. While such a statement may garner a speaker some political capital, it is not based on solid reasoning.

Economic and political processes are too complex to distill to such a simple cause-effect relationship. A speaker would need to use more solid reasoning, perhaps inductive reasoning through examples, to build up enough evidence to support that a correlation exists and a causal relationship is likely. When using causal reasoning, present evidence that shows the following: (1) the cause occurred before the effect, (2) the cause led to the effect, and (3) it is unlikely that other causes produced the effect.

11.6 Persuasive Strategies

Do you think you are easily persuaded? If you are like most people, you are not swayed easily to change your mind about something. Persuasion is difficult because changing views often makes people feel like they were either not informed or ill informed, which also means they have to admit they were wrong about something. We will learn about nine persuasive strategies that you can use to influence more effectively audience members’ beliefs, attitudes, and values. They are ethos, logos, pathos, positive motivation, negative motivation, cognitive dissonance, appeal to safety needs, appeal to social needs, and appeal to self-esteem needs.

Ethos, Logos, and Pathos

Ethos, logos, and pathos were Aristotle’s three forms of rhetorical proof, meaning they were primary to his theories of persuasion. Ethos refers to the credibility of a speaker and includes three dimensions: competence, trustworthiness, and dynamism. The two most researched dimensions of credibility are competence and trustworthiness (Stiff & Mongeau, 2003).

Competence refers to the perception of a speaker’s expertise in relation to the topic being discussed. A speaker can enhance their perceived competence by presenting a speech based in solid research and that is well organized and practiced. Competent speakers must know the content of their speech and be able to deliver that content. Trustworthiness refers to the degree that audience members perceive a speaker to be presenting accurate, credible information in a non-manipulative way. Perceptions of trustworthiness come from the content of the speech and the personality of the speaker. In terms of content, trustworthy speakers consider the audience throughout the speech-making process, present information in a balanced way, do not coerce the audience, cite credible sources, and follow the general principles of communication ethics. In terms of personality, trustworthy speakers are also friendly and warm (Stiff & Mongeau, 2003).

Dynamism refers to the degree to which audience members perceive a speaker to be outgoing and animated (Stiff & Mongeau, 2003). Two components of dynamism are charisma and energy. Charisma refers to a mixture of abstract and concrete qualities that make a speaker attractive to an audience. Charismatic people usually know they are charismatic because they have been told that in their lives, and people have been attracted to them.

Unfortunately, charisma is difficult to develop intentionally, and some people seem to have a naturally charismatic personality, while others do not. Even though not everyone can embody the charismatic aspect of dynamism, the other component of dynamism, energy, is something that everyone can fathom. Communicating enthusiasm for your topic and audience by presenting relevant content and using engaging delivery strategies such as vocal variety and eye contact can increase your dynamism.

Logos refers to the reasoning or logic of an argument. The presence of fallacies would obviously undermine a speaker’s appeal to logos. Speakers employ logos by presenting credible information as supporting material and verbally citing their sources during their speech. Using the guidelines from our earlier discussion of reasoning will also help a speaker create a rational appeal. Research shows that messages are more persuasive when arguments and their warrants are made explicit (Stiff & Mongeau, 2003). Carefully choosing supporting material that is verifiable, specific, and unbiased can help a speaker appeal to logos. Speakers can also appeal to logos by citing personal experience and providing the credentials and/or qualifications of sources of information (Cooper & Nothstine, 1996). Presenting a rational and logical argument is important, but speakers can be more effective if they bring in and refute counterarguments. The most effective persuasive messages are those that present two sides of an argument and refute the opposing side, followed by single argument messages, followed by messages that present counterarguments but do not refute them (Stiff & Mongeau, 2003). In short, by clearly showing an audience why one position is superior to another, speakers do not leave an audience to fill in the blanks of an argument, which could diminish the persuasive opportunity.

Pathos refers to emotional appeals. Aristotle was suspicious of too much emotional appeal, yet this appears to have become more acceptable in public speaking. Stirring emotions in an audience is a way to get them involved in the speech, and involvement can create more opportunities for persuasion and action. Reading in the paper that a house was burglarized may get your attention but think about how different your reaction would be if you found out it was your own home. Intentionally stirring someone’s emotions to get them involved in a message that has little substance would be unethical. Yet such spellbinding speakers have taken advantage of people’s emotions to get them to support causes, buy products, or engage in behaviors that they might not otherwise, if given the chance to see the faulty logic of a message.

Effective speakers should use emotional appeals that are also logically convincing, since audiences may be suspicious of a speech that is solely based on emotion. Emotional appeals are effective when you are trying to influence a behavior or you want your audience to take immediate action (Stiff & Mongeau, 2003). Emotions lose their persuasive effect more quickly than other types of persuasive appeals. Since emotions are often reactionary, they fade relatively quickly when a person is removed from the provoking situation (Fletcher, 2001).

Emotional appeals are also difficult for some because they require honed delivery skills and the ability to use words powerfully and dramatically. The ability to use vocal variety, cadence, and repetition to rouse an audience’s emotion is not easily attained. Think of how stirring Martin Luther King Jr.’s “I Have a Dream” speech was due to his ability to evoke the emotions of the audience. Dr. King used powerful and creative language in conjunction with his vocalics to deliver one of the most famous speeches in our history. Using concrete and descriptive examples can paint a picture in your audience member’s minds. Speakers can also use literal images, displayed using visual aids, to appeal to pathos.

Speakers should strive to appeal to ethos, logos, and pathos within a speech. A speech built primarily on ethos might lead an audience to think that a speaker is full of himself or herself. A speech full of facts and statistics appealing to logos would result in information overload. Speakers who rely primarily on appeals to pathos may be seen as overly passionate, biased, or unable to see other viewpoints.

Dissonance, Motivation, and Needs

Aristotle’s three rhetorical proofs—ethos, logos, and pathos—have been employed as persuasive strategies for thousands of years. More recently, persuasive strategies have been identified based on theories and evidence related to human psychology. Although based in psychology, such persuasive strategies are regularly employed and researched in communication due to their role in advertising, marketing, politics, and interpersonal relationships. The psychologically based persuasive appeals we will discuss are cognitive dissonance, positive and negative motivation, and appeals to needs.

Cognitive Dissonance

If you have studied music, you probably know what dissonance is. Some notes, when played together on a piano, produce a sound that is pleasing to our ears. When dissonant combinations of notes are played, we react by wincing or cringing because the sound is unpleasant to our ears. So dissonance is that unpleasant feeling we get when two sounds clash. The same principle applies to cognitive dissonance , which refers to the mental discomfort that results when new information clashes with or contradicts currently held beliefs, attitudes, or values. Using cognitive dissonance as a persuasive strategy relies on three assumptions: (1) people have a need for consistency in their thinking; (2) when inconsistency exists, people experience psychological discomfort; and (3) this discomfort motivates people to address the inconsistency to restore balance (Stiff & Mongeau, 2003). In short, when new information clashes with previously held information, an unpleasantness results, and we have to try to reconcile the difference.

Cognitive dissonance is not a single-shot persuasive strategy. As we have learned, people are resistant to change and not easy to persuade. While we might think that exposure to conflicting information would lead a rational person to change his or her mind, humans are not as rational as we think.

There are many different mental and logical acrobatics that people do to get themselves out of dissonance. Some frequently used strategies to resolve cognitive dissonance include discrediting the speaker or source of information, viewing yourself as an exception, seeking selective information that supports your originally held belief, or intentionally avoiding or ignoring sources of cognitive dissonance (Cooper & Nothstine, 1996). As you can see, none of those actually results in a person modifying their thinking, which means persuasive speech goals are not met. Of course, people cannot avoid dissonant information forever, so multiple attempts at creating cognitive dissonance can actually result in thought or behavior modification.

Positive and Negative Motivation

Positive and negative motivation are common persuasive strategies used by teachers, parents, and public speakers. Rewards can be used for positive motivation, and the threat of punishment or negative consequences can be used for negative motivation. We have already learned the importance of motivating an audience to listen to your message by making your content relevant and showing how it relates to their lives. We also learned an organizational pattern based on theories of motivation: Monroe’s Motivated Sequence. When using positive motivation , speakers implicitly or explicitly convey to the audience that listening to their message or following their advice will lead to positive results. Conversely, negative motivation implies or states that failure to follow a speaker’s advice will result in negative consequences. Positive and negative motivation as persuasive strategies match well with appeals to needs.

Appeals to Needs

Maslow’s hierarchy of needs states that there are several layers of needs that human beings pursue. They include physiological, safety, social, self-esteem, and self-actualization needs (Maslow, 1943). Since these needs are fundamental to human survival and happiness, tapping into needs is a common persuasive strategy. Appeals to needs are often paired with positive or negative motivation, which can increase the persuasiveness of the message.

Physiological needs form the base of the hierarchy of needs. The closer the needs are to the base, the more important they are for human survival. Speakers do not appeal to physiological needs. After all, a person who does not have food, air, or water is not very likely to want to engage in persuasion, and it would not be ethical to deny or promise these things to someone for persuasive gain. Some speakers attempt to appeal to self-actualization needs, but I argue that this is difficult to do ethically. Self-actualization refers to our need to achieve our highest potential, and these needs are much more intrapersonal than the others are. We achieve our highest potential through things that are individual to us, and these are often things that we protect from outsiders. Some examples include pursuing higher education and intellectual fulfillment, pursuing art or music, or pursuing religious or spiritual fulfillment. These are often things we do by ourselves and for ourselves, so I like to think of this as sacred ground that should be left alone. Speakers are more likely to be successful at focusing on safety, social, and self-esteem needs.

We satisfy our safety needs when we work to preserve our safety and the safety of our loved ones. Speakers can combine appeals to safety with positive motivation by presenting information that will result in increased safety and security. Combining safety needs and negative motivation, a speaker may convey that audience members’ safety and security will be put at risk if the speaker’s message is not followed. Combining negative motivation and safety needs depends on using some degree of fear as a motivator. Think of how the insurance industry relies on appeals to safety needs for their business. While this is not necessarily a bad strategy, it can be done more or less ethically.

Our social needs relate to our desire to belong to supportive and caring groups. We meet social needs through interpersonal relationships ranging from acquaintances to intimate partnerships. We also become part of interest groups or social or political groups that help create our sense of identity. The existence and power of peer pressure is a testament to the motivating power of social needs. People go to great lengths and sometimes make poor decisions they later regret to be a part of the “in-group.” Advertisers often rely on creating a sense of exclusivity to appeal to people’s social needs. Positive and negative motivation can be combined with social appeals. Positive motivation is present in messages that promise the receiver “in-group” status or belonging, and negative motivation can be seen in messages that persuade by saying, “Don’t be left out.” Although these arguments may rely on the bandwagon fallacy to varying degrees, they draw out insecurities people have about being in the “out-group.”

We all have a need to think well of ourselves and have others think well of us, which ties to our self-esteem needs . Messages that combine appeals to self-esteem needs and positive motivation often promise increases in respect and status. A financial planner may persuade by inviting a receiver to imagine prosperity that will result from accepting his or her message. A publicly supported radio station may persuade listeners to donate money to the station by highlighting a potential contribution to society. The health and beauty industries may persuade consumers to buy their products by promising increased attractiveness. While it may seem shallow to entertain such ego needs, they are an important part of our psychological makeup. Unfortunately, some sources of persuasive messages are more concerned with their own gain than the well-being of others and may take advantage of people’s insecurities in order to advance their persuasive message. Instead, ethical speakers should use appeals to self-esteem that focus on prosperity, contribution, and attractiveness in ways that empower listeners.

11.7 Sample Persuasive Speech  

Title: Education behind Bars Is the Key to Rehabilitation

General purpose: To persuade

Specific purpose : By the end of my speech, my audience will believe that prisoners should have the right to an education.

Thesis statement: There should be education in all prisons, because denying prisoners an education has negative consequences for the prisoner and society, while providing them with an education provides benefits for the prisoner and society.

Attention getter: “We must accept the reality that to confine offenders behind walls without trying to change them is an expensive folly with short-term benefits—winning battles while losing the war.” Supreme Court Justice Warren Burger spoke these words more than thirty years ago, and they support my argument today that prisoners should have access to education.

Introduction of topic: While we value education as an important part of our society, we do not value it equally for all. Many people do not believe that prisoners should have access to an education, but I believe they do.

Credibility and relevance: While researching this topic, my eyes were opened up to how much an education can truly affect a prisoner, and given my desire to be a teacher, I am invested in preserving the right to learn for everyone, even if they are behind bars. While I know from our audience analysis activity that some of you do not agree with me, you never know when this issue may hit close to home. Someday, someone you love might make a mistake in their life and end up in prison, and while they are there, I know you all would want them to receive an education so that when they get out, they will be better prepared to contribute to society.

Preview: Today, I invite you listen with an open mind as I discuss the need for prisoner education, a curriculum that will satisfy that need, and some benefits of prisoner education.

Transition: First, I will explain why prisoners need access to education.

1. According to a 2012 article in the journal Corrections Today on correctional education programs, most states have experienced an increase in incarceration rates and budgetary constraints over the past ten years, which has led many to examine best practices for reducing prison populations.

a. In that same article, criminologist and former research director of the Federal Bureau of Prisons states that providing correctional education is one of the most productive and important reentry services that our prisons offer.

b. His claim is supported by data collected directly from prisoners, 94 percent of whom identify education as a personal reentry need—ranking it above other needs such as financial assistance, housing, or employment.

c. Despite the fact that this need is clearly documented, funding for adult and vocational education in correctional education has decreased.

1. Many prisoners have levels of educational attainment that are far below those in the general population.

2. According to statistics from 2010, as cited in the Corrections Today article, approximately 40 percent of state prison inmates did not complete high school, as compared to 19 percent of the general population.

3. Additionally, while about 48 percent of the public have taken college classes, only about 11 percent of state prisoners have.

d. At the skill level, research from the United Kingdom, cited in the 2003 article from Studies in the Education of Adults titled “Learning behind Bars: Time to Liberate Prison Education,” rates of illiteracy are much higher among the prison population than the general population, and there is a link between poor reading skills and social exclusion that may lead people to antisocial behavior.

1. Prisoner education is also needed to break a cycle of negativity and stigma to which many prisoners have grown accustomed.

2. The article from Studies in the Education of Adults that I just cited states that prisoners are often treated as objects or subjected to objectifying labels like “ addict , sexual offender , and deviant .”

3. While these labels may be accurate in many cases, they do not do much to move the prisoner toward rehabilitation.

4. The label student , however, has the potential to do so because it has positive associations and can empower the prisoner to make better choices to enhance his or her confidence and self-worth.

Transition: Now that I have established the need for prisoner education, let’s examine how we can meet that need.

2. In order to meet the need for prisoner education that I have just explained, it is important to have a curriculum that is varied and tailored to various prisoner populations and needs.

a. The article from Corrections Today notes that education is offered to varying degrees in most US prisons, but its presence is often debated and comes under increased scrutiny during times of budgetary stress.

b. Some states have implemented programs that require inmates to attend school for a certain amount of time if they do not meet minimum standards for skills such as reading or math.

c. While these are useful programs, prisoner education should not be limited to or focused on those with the least amount of skills.

d. The article notes that even prisoners who have attended or even graduated from college may benefit from education, as they can pursue specialized courses or certifications.

e. Based on my research, I would propose that the prison curriculum have four tiers: one that addresses basic skills that prisoners may lack, one that prepares prisoners for a GED, one that prepares prisoners for college-level work, and one that focuses on life and social skills.

1. The first tier of the education program should focus on remediation and basic skills, which is the most common form of prisoner education as noted by Foley and Gao in their 2004 article from the Journal of Correctional Education that studied educational practices at several institutions.

a. These courses will teach prisoners basic reading, writing, and math skills that may be lacking.

b. Since there is a stigma associated with a lack of these basic skills, early instruction should be one-one-one or in small groups.

2. The second tier should prepare prisoners who have not completed the equivalent of high school to progress on to a curriculum modeled after that of most high schools, which will prepare them for a GED.

3. The third tier should include a curriculum based on the general education learning goals found at most colleges and universities and/or vocational training.

a. Basic general education goals include speaking, writing, listening, reading, and math.

b. Once these general education requirements have been met, prisoners should be able to pursue specialized vocational training or upper-level college courses in a major of study, which may need to be taken online through distance learning, since instructors may not be available to come to the actual prisons to teach.

4. The fourth tier includes training in social and life skills that most people learn through family and peer connections, which many prisoners may not have had.

a. Some population-specific areas of study that would not be covered in a typical classroom include drug treatment and anger management.

b. Life skills such as budgeting, money management, and healthy living can increase confidence.

c. Classes that focus on social skills, parenting, or relational communication can also improve communication skills and relational satisfaction; for example, workshops teaching parenting skills have been piloted to give fathers the skills needed to communicate effectively with their children, which can increase feelings of self-worth.

f. According to a 2007 article by Behan in the Journal of Correctional Education , prisons should also have extracurricular programs that enhance the educational experience.

1. Under the supervision of faculty and/or staff, prisoners could be given the task of organizing an outside speaker to come to the prison or put together a workshop.

2. Students could also organize a debate against students on the outside, which could allow the prisoners to interact (face-to-face or virtually) with other students and allow them to be recognized for their academic abilities.

3. Even within the prison, debates, trivia contests, paper contests, or speech contests could be organized between prisoners or between prisoners and prison staff as a means of healthy competition.

4. Finally, prisoners who are successful students should be recognized and put into peer-mentoring roles, because, as Behan states in the article, “a prisoner who…has had an inspirational learning experience acts as a more positive advocate for the school than any [other method].”

Transition: The model for prisoner education that I have just outlined will have many benefits.

3. Educating prisoners can benefit inmates, those who work in prisons, and society.

a. The article I just cited from the Journal of Correctional Education states that the self-reflection and critical thinking that are fostered in an educational setting can help prisoners reflect on how their actions affected them, their victims, and/or their communities, which may increase self-awareness and help them better reconnect with a civil society and reestablish stronger community bonds.

1. The Corrections Today article I cited earlier notes that a federally funded three-state survey provided the strongest evidence to date that prisoner education reduces the recidivism rate and increases public safety.

2. The Corrections Today article also notes that prisoners who completed a GED reoffended at a rate 20 percent lower than the general prison population, and those that completed a college degree reoffended at a rate 44 percent lower than the general prison population.

b. So why does prisoner education help reduce recidivism rates?

1. Simply put, according to the article in the Studies in the Education of Adults I cited earlier, the skills gained through good prison education programs make released prisoners more desirable employees, which increases their wages and helps remove them from a negative cycles of stigma and poverty that led many of them to crime in the first place.

2. Further, the ability to maintain consistent employment has been shown to reduce the rate of reoffending.

3. Education does not just improve the lives of the prisoners; it also positively affects the people who work in prisons.

c. An entry on eHow.com by Kinney about the benefits of prisoners getting GEDs notes that a successful educational program in a prison can create a more humane environment that will positively affect the officers and staff as well.

1. Such programs also allow prisoners to do more productive things with their time, which lessens violent and destructive behavior and makes prison workers’ jobs safer.

2. Prisoner education can also save cash-strapped states money.

3. Giving prisoners time-off-sentence credits for educational attainment can help reduce the prison population, as eligible inmates are released earlier because of their educational successes.

4. As noted by the Corrections Today article, during the 2008–9 school year the credits earned by prisoners in the Indiana system led to more than $68 million dollars in avoided costs.

Transition to conclusion and summary of importance: In closing, it is easy to see how beneficial a good education can be to a prisoner. Education may be something the average teenager or adult takes for granted, but for a prisoner it could be the start of a new life.

Review of main points: There is a clear need for prisoner education that can be met with a sound curriculum that will benefit prisoners, those who work in prisons, and society.

Closing statement: While education in prisons is still a controversial topic, I hope you all agree with me and Supreme Court Justice Burger, whose words opened this speech, when we say that locking a criminal away may offer a short-term solution in that it gets the criminal out of regular society, but it doesn’t better the prisoner and it doesn’t better us in the long run as a society.

Figure 11.1: Types of propositions with examples. Kindred Grey. 2022. CC BY 4.0 .

Figure 11.2: Inductive reasoning. Kindred Grey. 2022. CC BY 4.0 . Includes Lightbulb by Maxim Kulikov from NounProject , Magnifying Glass by Pedro Santos from NounProject , and Brain by Bernar Novalyi from NounProject (all Noun Project license ).

Figure 11.3: Deductive reasoning. Kindred Grey. 2022. CC BY 4.0 . Includes Lightbulb by Maxim Kulikov from NounProject , Magnifying Glass by Pedro Santos from NounProject , and Paper by AdbA Icons ❤️ from NounProject (all Noun Project license ).

Figure 11.4: Aristotle’s modes of persuassion. Kindred Grey. 2022. CC BY 4.0 .

Figure 11.5: Maslow’s hierarchy of needs. Kindred Grey. 2022. CC BY 4.0 .

Section 11. 1-11.4

Barton, K., & Tucker, B. G. (2021, February 20). Constructing a persuasive speech . https://socialsci.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Communication/Public_Speaking/Exploring_Public_Speaking_(Barton_and_Tucker)/13%3A_Persuasive_Speaking/13.05%3A_Constructing_a_Persuasive_Speech

Hamm, P. H. (2006). Teaching and persuasive communication: Class presentation skills . Harriet W. Sheridan Center for Teaching and Learning at Brown University.

Macasieb, D. (2018, June 13). Speech patterns: The proposition-to-proof versus the problem-solution method . https://drumac.com/2018/06/13/speech-patterns-the-proposition-to-proof-versus-the-problem-solution-method/

McCroskey, J. C. (1966). Toward an understanding of the importance of ‘evidence’ in persuasive communication. The Pennsylvania Speech Annual , 23 , 65–71.

McCroskey, J. C. (1969). A summary of experimental research on the effects of evidence in persuasive communication. Quarterly Journal of Speech , 55 (2), 169-176. https://doi.org/10.1080/00335636909382942

Nordquist, R. (2020, December 3). What does it mean to make a claim during an argument? https://www.thoughtco.com/what-is-claim-argument-1689845

Poggi, I. (2005). The goals of persuasion. Pragmatics and Cognition , 13 (2), 297-335. https://doi.org/10.1075/pc.13.2.04pog

Watt, S. S., & Barnett, J. T. (2021, January 4). Organizing persuasive messages . https://socialsci.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Communication/Public_Speaking/Public_Speaking_(The_Public_Speaking_Project)/16%3A_Persuasive_Speaking/16.09%3A_Organizing_Persuasive_Messages

Williams, E. (2018, October 19). Effective persuasive communication . https://smallbusiness.chron.com/effective-persuasive-communication-56248.html

Section 11.5

ReferencesCooper, M. D., & Nothstine, W. L. (1996). Power persuasion: Moving an ancient art into the media age. Educational Video Group.

Walter, O. M., Speaking to inform and persuade . Macmillan.

Section 11.6

Cooper, M. D., & Nothstine, W. L. (1996). Power persuasion: Moving an ancient art into the media age . Educational Video Group.

Fletcher, L. (2001). How to design and deliver speeches (7th ed.). Longman.

Maslow, A. H. (1943). A theory of human motivation. Psychological Review, 50 (4), 370–396. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0054346

Stiff, J. B., & Mongeau, P. A. (2003). Persuasive communication (2nd ed.). Guilford Press.

Sample Persuasive Speech

Bayliss, P. (2003). Learning behind bars: Time to liberate prison education. Studies in the Education of Adults, 35 (2), 157–172. https://doi.org/10.1080/02660830.2003.11661480

Behan, C. (2007). Context, creativity and critical reflection: Education in correctional institutions. Journal of Correctional Education, 58 (2), 157–169. https://www.jstor.org/stable/23282734

Foley, R. M., & Gao, J. (2004). Correctional education: Characteristics of academic programs serving incarcerated adults. Journal of Correctional Education, 55 (1), 6–21. https://www.jstor.org/stable/23292120

Kinney, A. (2011). What are the benefits of inmates getting GEDs? Ehow.com . Retrieved from https://ehow.com/list_6018033_benefits-inmates-getting-geds_.html

Steurer, S. J., Linton, J., Nally, J., & Lockwood, S. (2010). The top-nine reasons to increase correctional education programs. Corrections Today, 72 (4), 40–43.

The statement that will be supported by evidence

Also called grounds, it supports the claim

The underlying justification that connects the claim and the evidence

A five step organizational pattern to help persuade an audience. 1. Attention Step: Grab the audience’s attention in the introduction. 2. Need Step: Establish the reason that your topic needs to be addressed. Satisfaction Step: Present a solution to the problem that you are addressing. 4. Visualization Step: Incorporate a positive/negative motivation to support the relationship you have set up between the need and your proposal. 5. Action Step: Include a call to action that tells people what they can do about the situation.

Reaches conclusions through citation of examples and is the most frequently used form of logical reasoning

Derives specifics from what is already known

Argues to establish a relationship between a cause and effect

Refers to the credibility of the speaker and includes dimensions: competence, trustworthiness, and dynamism

Refers to the perception of a speaker’s expertise in relation to the topic being discussed

The second component of ethos and is the degree that audience members perceive a speaker to be presenting accurate, credible information in a non-manipulative way

Refers to the degree to which audience members perceive a speaker to be outgoing and animated

The reasoning or logic of an argument

The emotional appeal

Refers to the mental discomfort that results when new information clashes with or contradicts currently held beliefs, attitudes, or values

Communication in the Real World Copyright © by Faculty members in the School of Communication Studies, James Madison University is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

• school Campus Bookshelves
• menu_book Bookshelves
• perm_media Learning Objects
• login Login
• how_to_reg Request Instructor Account
• hub Instructor Commons
• Download Page (PDF)
• Download Full Book (PDF)
• Periodic Table
• Physics Constants
• Scientific Calculator
• Reference & Cite
• Tools expand_more
• Readability

selected template will load here

This action is not available.

10.2: The Purposes of Public Speaking

• Last updated
• Save as PDF
• Page ID 147049

• Lisa Coleman, Thomas King, & William Turner
• Southwest Tennessee Community College

Learning Objectives

After completing this section, students should be able to:

• describe how public speaking differs from Interpersonal Communication and Small Group Communication.
• apply the traits of a good speech in creating and presenting a speech.
• describe the general speech purposes.

The oldest form of public communication and the precursor to mass media is the simple act of one person rising and expressing their thoughts to the group. Public discourse is the foundation of society; it is how groups of people address and resolve differences collectively and peacefully. With the rise of democracy in Ancient Greece, the value of public speaking gained prominence. A citizen's ability to speak their mind in public was highly valued and a sign of civic engagement.

Although we have so many avenues to express ourselves, from in-person to online, the ability to craft and share a thoughtful, intelligent message is still an important skill. For a person's career, civic involvement, and political engagement, becoming proficient in public speaking is highly valuable.

The Nature of Public Speaking

Public speaking has three striking characteristics that set it off from interpersonal communication and small group communication.

First, public speaking is the act of one person speaking to many . Instead of focusing on an interactive nature, public speaking focuses on one person, the speaker, developing and presenting a message to a group of individuals.

Second, public speaking is a more formal presentation, meaning it is bound by specific strategies and techniques. Good public speaking requires more planning, development, and self-reflexiveness than the other two contexts. Third, in the other two contexts, we see all members communicating from a position of shared, equal responsibility. In public speaking, the speaker bears more responsibility as the message is one-directional, and the feedback the speaker receives from the audience is subtler, such as facial expressions, body posture, and fidgeting. Public speaking is still an interaction, just like an interpersonal and small group, but the responsibility for success is less balanced with more responsibility being placed on the speaker.

A "Good" Speech

Unfortunately, for most people, our exposure to public speaking has left us with a distorted view of what makes a "good" speech. Virtually anytime we ask a class, "What is the first thing that comes to mind when you think of listening to a speech," the answer is "boring." This does not have to be the case; it is the job of the speaker to make choices that directly influence how interesting or boring a speech is going to be.

As speakers, we have the obligation and ability to choose how effectively and dynamically we will present ourselves and the information to the audience. We can give interesting, dynamic, energetic, and engaging speeches. Each of us has experienced teachers who were boring and monotone, but we have also experienced teachers who were dynamic and energetic. The latter group chose to make the speeches (lectures) more interesting. To make a speech more interesting and effective, we need to understand what makes a good speech:

• A good speech is well structured and signposted to enhance clarity and memory value. A good speech is organized and easily followed with clear, obvious transitions. Our job as speakers is to present a message clearly and thoughtfully, and a clear structure facilitates that.
• A good speech should sound like an "organized conversation." The phrase is meant to invoke the image of a speaker presenting naturally and comfortably; just talking to the audience, in an organized, easily followed manner.
• A good speech has a purpose, clear to the audience and to which the speaker adheres. Good speakers make their purpose clear, and they fulfill that. They do not wander, drift about, shift purposes, or mislead the audience. They do not start off informing the audience, and then suddenly shift to persuasion.
• A good speaker is active, not passive. Too many speakers, especially novice speakers, tend to use the "open my mouth, let the words fall out" approach to speaking. This thoughtless approach to public speaking is not effective. Good speakers make choices, determining throughout their speech the best strategy for the given audience. Through the preparation and practice process, we make decisions based on what we think will increase the likelihood of success. Such strategic thinking requires careful consideration of the topic, the audience, the speaker, and knowledge of the interaction of these three components.
• A good speaker works to create immediacy with the audience. Immediacy is a sense of connection; that the speaker, the topic, and the audience are all working together . Good speakers see a speech as a time to share a message with an audience, building a bridge between the speaker and the audience. Too often novice speakers see the audience as a barrier to success, a collective of judgmental individuals out to embarrass the speaker. However, that is simply not true for most audiences. Audiences want the speech to be good because it validates the time spent listening, it is more enjoyable, and it simply makes the time go faster. If a speaker taps into the audience's interests and personality, they can be quite effective in engaging the audience. Such engagement does not happen automatically; it is the result of thoughtful planning and preparation.

The public speaking situation is quite different from interpersonal communication and small group communication. The degree of advanced planning, conscious decision-making, and communicator responsibility is much higher when giving a speech. We have been taught that when a person goes to the front of the room to speak, the speaker is now "in charge" of the event. We must meet that expectation, take charge of the event, and fulfill our responsibilities for success. Speeches are only as good as the audience thinks they are; the speaker must rise to the challenge of presenting a good speech.

General Speech Purposes

When developing a speech, we need to know why we are speaking. Before even considering the topic, we need to know if our purpose is to inform, persuade, entertain, or if it is a special occasion.

Speeches to Inform

Speeches to inform are those in which we are aiming to enlighten or to further educate the audience, but in an objective, non-directive manner. We provide the information about the topic to the audience, but we are not directing the audience to believe, feel, or act in a specific manner. There are four types of informative speeches.

• Objects: The term “objects” encompasses many topics we might not ordinarily consider to be “things.” It’s a category of speech that discusses the history or development of people, institutions, places, substances, and inanimate things. The following are some of these topics: Catherine the Great , Dream catchers, Aristotle, Hubble telescope, Seattle’s Space Needle, Malta, Silicon chip, Spruce Goose, Medieval armor, DDT insecticide, Soy inks, and NAACP.
• Processes: If your speech topic is a "process," your goal should be to make a speech that helps your audience understand it or be able to perform it . In either instance, processes involve a predictable series of changes, phases, or steps. The following are some of these topics: Soil erosion, Cell division, Physical therapy, Volcanic eruption, Paper recycling, Consumer credit evaluations, Scholarship money searches, Navy Seal training, Portfolio building, and the development of Alzheimer’s disease.

Organizing your facts is crucially important when discussing a process. Every stage of a process must be clear and understandable. When two or more things occur at the same time, as they might in the development of Alzheimer’s disease, it is important to make it clear that several things are occurring at once. For example, as plaque is accumulating in the brain, the patient is likely to begin exhibiting various symptoms.

• Events: An "event" can be something that occurred only once or an event that is repeated . The following are some of these topics: the murder of Emmett Till, the Iditarod Dogsled Race, the Industrial Revolution, the discovery of the smallpox vaccine, the Bikini Atoll atomic bomb tests, the Bay of Pigs, the Super Bowl, and the Academy Awards.
• Concepts: "Concepts" are abstract ideas that exist independent of whether they are observed or practiced , such as the example of social equality that follows. Concepts can include hypotheses and theories. The following are some of these topics: the glass ceiling, Ethnocentrism, Honor codes, Autism, Karma, Wellness, Fairness theory, Bioethics, The American Dream, and Social equality.

Speeches to Persuade

Speeches to persuade are those in which we are aiming to influence the audience in some fashion. They are subjective and highly directive. The speaker has a bias toward a specific belief, attitude, or action, and the speaker works to direct the audience on what to believe, what opinion to have, or what action to undertake.

In persuasion, the issue of ethics becomes paramount. Some students erroneously believe that speakers always must give both sides of the issue to be ethical, but that is not true. When Lisa shops for a car, she knows the salesperson is out to persuade her to buy; thus, she expects messages designed to urge her to that action. If the salesperson gives accurate, verifiable, and truthful information, there is no ethical violation.

It is our job to provide the audience with the most accurate information we can find, and to present that information honestly, not distorting it. We must cite our sources to give due credit, and the topic should be one that can be justified as beneficial to the audience, not just to the speaker.

There are three types of persuasive speeches.

• Questions of Fact: These persuasive speeches influence beliefs . A belief is what we hold to be true or false . For example, the knowledge that the Earth rotates around the sun is a belief; we believe it to be a fact. The idea that smoking can cause cancer is a belief. If we try to persuade the audience that consuming too much fat can cause colon cancer, we are trying to get the audience to believe what is true or false about the impact of fat in our diets.
• Questions of Value: These persuasive speeches influence attitudes . We attempt to influence how an audience judges an event or idea; the speaker is trying to influence the audience's opinion of something. For these speeches, the speaker is attempting to make the audience think of the topic on a scale of good to bad, or desirable to not desirable. To argue the Governor of Minnesota is doing "a good job" (or "a bad job") is an attempt to influence an attitude or opinion. With statements like these, it is not a matter of true or false, black or white. It is a matter of placing the Governor on a range of opinions from highly positive to highly negative.
• Questions of Policy: These persuasive speeches influence action . These propositions are easy to identify because they usually have the word “should” in them. These propositions call for a change in policy or practice (including those in a government, community, or school), or they can call for the audience to adopt a certain behavior. Speeches with propositions of policy can be those that call for passive acceptance and agreement from the audience and those that try to instigate the audience to action, to do something immediately or in the long-term. For example, The state of Georgia should require drivers over the age of 75 to take a vision test and present a certificate of good health from a doctor before renewing their licenses.

The three types of persuasive speeches build on each other. If Yousef is going to give a "Call to Action" speech asking for the audience to donate blood during Ridgewater College's annual blood drive, he will need to show the audience there is a need for blood (a belief), that donating blood is a good thing to do (an attitude), and how to participate in the blood drive (an action).

Speeches to Entertain

Although not commonly done in an introductory Communication Studies class, there is a third general speech purpose: a speech to entertain. We would hope all speeches are entertaining in some fashion, whether through humor, interest, or seriousness, so the audience found the speech engaging and intriguing. This also includes special occasion speeches designed to fit the specific event at which they are being given. While each one has its own unique guidelines, the key point is to develop the speech consistent with that occasion.

Some common special occasion speeches include:

Eulogy : a speech given at a funeral or memorial service to honor the deceased.

Introduction : a speech given to introduce a speaker to an audience.

Toast : a speech given honoring a person or group, such as a wedding toast.

Giving an Award : a speech given to bestow honor on a person.

Accepting an Award : a speech given to communicate appreciation for an award.

Commencement: a speech given at graduation, typically addressing the past (the work done to achieve a goal) and the future (challenging the graduates to learn more, help others, get involved in social issues, or otherwise continue personal growth).

Special occasion speeches are short and focused on the event at hand. Humor is commonly used, even with many eulogies, but only when appropriate for the event and audience.

Key Concepts

The terms and concepts students should be familiar with from this section include:

The Value of Public Speaking

• Societal functions
• Personal benefits

A Good Speech

• Introduction
• Giving an Award
• Accepting an Award
• Commencement

Gallup. (2001, March 19). Snakes Top List of Americans' Fears. Retrieved from http://www.gallup.com/poll/1891/snak...ans-fears.aspx

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

General Speaking Purpose

• An informative speech provides an audience with new, unique, and/or innovative knowledge on a distinct topic. A speech to inform can: tell an engaging story with an intrinsic lesson; explain or clarify a difficult or complicated concept (often called the definition speech); or show an audience how to do something (often called the demonstration speech or how-to speech). Examples include a professor delivering a lecture, a student presenting an oral report; skilled demonstrations outlining skills such as cooking, woodworking, or welding; and biographical tribute speeches designed to honor a dignitary. Part II of this book ( Chapters 4–10 ) will outline methods for delivering an effective informative speech.
• A persuasive speech has most, if not all, of the elements of a speech to inform, but takes the information a step further and uses it to change audience attitudes, opinions, or behaviors. Examples of speeches to persuade might include advertisements, political speeches, religious services, donation/registration drives, negotiations of various types, or daily conversations. Some persuasive speeches seek to alter attitudes, some go further and seek action as a result, and others may seek to inspire others. Part III of this book ( Chapters 11 and 12 ) will examine how persuasive speaking differs from speaking to inform and provides strategies to craft effective persuasive and motivating messages.
• Finally, a speech designed to mark a special occasion or entertain audiences does simply that—it amuses, commemorates, arouses interest, diverts attention, or perhaps, in some cases, even “warms up” an audience for a larger event. Examples of speaking to entertain include stand-up comedy, a toast for a colleague or friend, or even storytelling (which differs from a speech to inform since there is no explicit lesson or moral to be learned). This book does not focus on this type of speech.

While three general purposes attempt to accomplish different things, crossover between each of them does exist. In other words, a speech to inform can easily entertain, as well as present compelling information that persuades the audience to adapting a particular viewpoint. A speech to persuade can present an audience with fresh, new information while still managing to engage and entertain. However, public speakers need to keep their general purpose in mind at all times in order to craft a masterful speech. All too often, novice speakers want to focus more on providing entertainment, and as a result, their general purpose gets lost since the focus has shifted to generating laughter as opposed to providing information for the audience. Similarly, a novice speaker might start out with a speech to inform, but end up attempting to persuade the audience by the end of the speech, in which case, the general purpose has failed. Therefore, it remains absolutely critical that speakers remember the general purpose as they compose their messages so that they remain focused on the primary goal of the speech.

The Three General Purposes of a Speech

To persuade, to entertain/mark a special occasion.

Messages that Matter: Public Speaking in the Information Age - Third Edition Copyright © 2023 by North Idaho College is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book