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. In our daily lives, we encounter some sorts of persuasion that makes us to think twice if we’ll agree on that or not. It is most likely seen during campaign periods where most politicians really show themselves as somewhat the good or perfect leader that we need. They’ll brag all their credentials and principal sponsorship to persuade voters that they are the leaders that this country need. Some of us are easily persuaded and some really uphold their own beliefs. If you are like most people, you aren’t swayed easily to change your mind about something.
According to Condor et al. (2013), political rhetoric is mostly concerned with the strategies used in constructing persuasive messages in debates and disputes. In the Chapter 9 of Condor et al.’s (2013) Political Rhetoric, they discussed some of the strategies that contemporary political communicators may use to achieve consubstantiality when faced with composite audiences. First is the Taking and Avoiding Side. In this strategy, we consider how speakers may present their own rhetorical projects as exercises in political consensus. Second is the Explicit Appeals to Common In-group Membership where we consider cases in which politicians appeal explicitly to broadly defined in-groups. Third is Constructing Aspirational Identities. In this strategy we examine the ways in which political commentators address aspirational categories, representing consubstantiality as a future project rather than a current condition. Finally, the Implicit Displays of Rhetorical Alignment where we discuss how speakers may implicitly display allegiance with mixed and multiple audiences, focusing in particular on the use of first-person pronouns.
As the 2019 National Elections is fast approaching and the campaign period has started, most politicians really maximize their efforts and capabilities to reach to most voters in our country. Those who have their political parties are attending their political launch in several provinces. They are presenting what they want and what they’ll do if ever they win in the election. Major television networks in our country are organizing Town Hall Debates which are ways for local and national politicians to meet with their constituents, either to hear from them on topics of interest or to discuss specific upcoming legislation or regulation. It is also a way for them to say their ideas for the future of the country and their comments about their opponents. Also, in this kind of debate, candidates are given time to state their plan of action before the other candidates deliver their rebuttals. Some politicians who seek for positions are showing ethos which relates to the credibility of a speaker.
During political campaigns, politicians who are seeking positions really do to reach almost everyone of us so that we’ll know what are their platforms and plans for our country. Some politicians are campaigning with their political parties. When I am watching Town Hall Debates, there are politicians who use language that suits the audiences and whose plans is for the Filipino. With these, politicians will have an explicit appeal to common in-group membership. I often encounter politicians who relate themselves to the greater audiences by establishing a commonality among them. I also encountered politicians which goals are really for the benefit of the greater mass which will have an appeal to them. Most of us want a leader who relates to what we feel and what we want to achieve.
There are also politicians whose goals really pertain to a certain audiences. Most of them would advocate for those who are in the marginalized sectors and those who are currently positioned outside. By constructing future identities of audience members as more empowered and privileged members of society, these politicians aim to rally the public towards an achievable change.
There are also politicians who implicitly display rhetorical alignment by indirectly influencing the thought of the audiences. Politicians go from place to place to have a personal encounter with the audience to show who they really are. Most politicians talk to certain audiences and even shake their hand so that they will appeal as kind, benevolent and the one who really care for the mass which the audience members want. Some politicians also dress as if they are like the audiences. They will also smile untiringly from the start up to the end of the event so that they will not appeal too serious. They will also use language with inclusive pronouns such as “we”, “us”, and “our” because with this, you’re saying that it’s not just your fight but the country’s fight.
Speakers develop ethos by appearing competent, trustworthy, and dynamic; sharing their credentials and/or relevant personal experience; presenting a balanced and noncoercive argument; citing credible sources; using appropriate language and grammar; being perceived as likable; and appearing engaged with the topic and audience through effective delivery. But most politicians that I encounter these days are lacking some of these criteria to be called as a credible speaker. Still, there are politicians who persuade and capture the heart of some voters through their charismatic words and their established names even though they presented fake credentials or that they have a bad record when it comes to public service and corruption. Charisma refers to a mixture of abstract and concrete qualities that make a speaker attractive to an audience. An audience is more likely to be persuaded by someone who they trust, and this is largely independent of the topic being presented. If the audience trusts you, then they expect that what you are telling them is true.
These strategies have an effect though they are not that already effective for me because some politicians who used these strategies way back were just remained as promises and did not make it into reality. Though some tried, but they failed.
I admire politicians who really use this ethos strategy and encompass credibility. This strategy is really effective for me as it will persuade your audiences through your honesty, generosity and benevolence. Ethos is about your audience’s perception of you, and this perception can be formed over many months or years, or perhaps over many past speeches. I am convinced of politicians who have unquestionable integrity and credibility. We should be critical in selecting the leaders who will govern us as the future of this country will lie in them.
References
Condor, S., Tileaga, C., & Billig, M. (2013). Political Rhetoric. In L. Huddy, D. Sears, & J. Levy (Eds), Oxford Handbook of Political Psychology (pp. 262-297). England: Oxford University Press
Halloran, Michael. Aristotle’s Concept of Ethos, or If Not His, Somebody Else’s. 1st ed. Vol. 1. N.p.: Taylor & Francis, 1982. Print. 15 Nov. 2014.
Jerralson's Blog 