October Blog Post

Hi again,

For those of you that don’t know, I am a Communications major at Boise State University, with an emphasis in Public Relations but also the various forms of Media. I focus on how the two can be tangled together. I’m also fascinated with rhetoric and therefore do quite a bit of research on all three.

According to Merriam-Webster rhetoric is defined as, “the art of effective or persuasive speaking or writing, especially the use of figures of speech and other compositional techniques.” In layman's terms, it’s the act of manipulation through speech.

It’s safe to say that you come across variant forms of rhetoric daily. It’s in the books/ newspapers/ magazines/ literature you read as well as the tv shows/ movies/ “youtube” videos you watch. It’s in what you say and hear, it’s even on what you see on social media.

Not only does rhetoric surround you, and me, but it is consumes the cultural communication we're apart of. The various "faces" available when communicating is what allows rhetoric to be so powerful. Which is a part of why I find public relations so interesting. The ability to put on a face/ image/ stance/ etc. and change as you please or as needed to intriguing.

Similar to how words matter to our communication, so do symbols. Some might even say they play a bigger role. Palczewski, Ice, and Fritch say that, "People's symbol use makes a difference in interpersonal relationships too. . . People's symbol use also makes a difference in public communication. The words of public figures, as well as symbols of citizenship, posses the power to lead, reflect, inspire, praise, unite, confront, provoke, and entertain. . ." The theory of how the tone of a conversation matters more than the words being spoken can be applied in the same manner.

Rhetoric, in any discipline, can be analyzed and analyzed, again and again, until the desired result is found, or a new result appears, or even until you've hit a brick wall and begin to over analyze. The other week in class we watched a "documentary" about Disney, and how the company hides behind a curtain of innocence that doesn't really exist. Let me be clear, there is a "curtain" but it's sheer so it doesn't really do the intended job of a curtain. The myth that Disney movies have "hidden" political, behavioral and societal messages is true. But can I ask why one would go looking for that within a children's film? I can understand that adults will be watching these films also and may need an attention grabber/ keeper but seriously? By seeking this out and bringing attention to it they've hit the brick wall and have begun to over-analyze something that is better left alone. The biggest issue behind bringing light to this myth is that the stigma that follows can be worse than the actual issue. I believe that by using rhetorical appeals to Ethos, Logos, and Pathos we can break down the barriers from the aforementioned stigma's.