Welcome to my e-portfolio!

My name is Claire Greensmith and welcome to my e-portfolio. I am currently an undergraduate student at the Schreyer Honors College at Penn State University studying International Politics and French.

A student at Penn State, I have learned a great deal, both inside and outside of the classroom, including how to speak French proficiently, be assertive and eat on a budget. One of the most important skills I have come to learn is rhetoric, the ability to effectively speak to an audience.

 Rhetoric is everywhere. Between music, advertisements, clothing and conversations, arguments are constantly being made to convince an audience. But just because an argument is being made does not necessarily mean that it is successful.

As an observer of the world around me, I have come to notice the successes and failures of rhetoric. In a world swirling with so many arguments, it is essential to find the right recipe of ethos, pathos and logos to effectively convey a message to an audience. Without ethos there is no credibility or reason for the audience to believe the message. The absence of pathos leaves the argument flat and the audience uninterested. Furthermore, one cannot expect the audience to grasp the argument if they cannot follow the argument’s logic in the absence of logos. These three are essential ingredients to the successful use of rhetoric.

It is my goal to become a master of rhetoric, to be able to conjure up an effective argument and leave my audience convinced. In an attempt to do this I have learned about other useful rhetorical tools; a pinch of kairos, or the most effective and opportune moment for rhetoric, and a dash of exigence, or call to action, entice the audience to pay attention and act upon what I am saying.

Like others, my use of rhetoric will not always work. There will continue to be times where the audience will not understand my logic or question my credibility. As a result, my argument will fall flat on its face. But just as it is important for the rhetor to produce a sound argument, so it is that each audience member examines it. It is my opinion that a perceptive audience helps produce a better rhetor.

With this in mind, as I continue to observe the rhetoric around me I hope to improve my own rhetorical skills. Here, in my e-portfolio, I have posted some of my uses of rhetoric. I hope that  you may find them effective. 

Link to Claire Greensmith's e-portfolio

Free Hugs

Yesterday I was leaving class when I spotted a man standing outside of the Thomas Building  holding a sign that said “Free Hugs”.

This man had chosen a good spot; in between classes, thousands of students walk by this area of campus. His sign was simple enough to read. The words were short and the font was large and bold. There he stood, arms up in the air with a sign calling upon others to give or receive hugs (exigence!). I did not stop to give this man a hug, here’s why:

1.     His failure to consider his audience’s background: I was raised with the phrase “don’t talk to strangers.” One was not to get too close to strange people, not to mention hug them. Assuming others were brought up like me, it is likely that his message is doomed to be ignored because it does not coincide with his audience’s background. The audience, like me, will not respond to the exigence and leave him with empty arms.

2.     Lack of ethos: Who is this man? Why is he offering free hugs? Why should I give him a hug? Is he an exceptional hugger? 

      Perhaps he is conducting a sociology experiment, in which case he can count out any hug from me – I’m not a lab rat and my hugs are worth more than experimental results. Or perhaps he is just a good-natured man wanting to make others’ days better with free hugs. But how would I know? The man neither identifies himself nor his objective, leaving his audience confused as to his ethos. As a result, I was unresponsive to his call for free hugs. A little ethos could have gone a long way.

3.     Lack of pathos: ‘Free’ and ‘hugs’ – I think that these two words are great and together they sound like a nice concept (though I’ve never heard of anyone charging money for hugs). My trouble with the concept is the man giving the hugs. I’ve never seen him before and, absent of personal connection, hence felt no desire to hug him.

      There are other things I’d much rather hug than this man: my pillow, my mom, my dog etc. By hugging these I’d get comfort and love unlike from this stranger where I’d feel clueless and uncomfortable among the passersby. His hugs mean nothing to me. Perhaps if he had explained that it would make him feel better, his offer of a free hug would have tugged at my emotions and prompted me to actually hug him, but such was not the case. 

Although I did not embrace this man, perhaps other students, stressed about exams, breakups and life, might have been desperate enough to get some comfort from the stranger’s hugs. But in my opinion, this man failed rhetorically. 

Howling Rhetoric

The Great Hall is filled with students eating breakfast when an owl flies in any crashes in front of Harry, Ron and Hermione with a special letter for Ron. But this isn’t just any letter, it’s a Howler, or a magical letter enchanted to have the author’s voice speak the written message to the recipient when opened.

The connotation of “howler’ appears to be frightening to the wide-eyed recipient Ron, and entertaining for his snickering peers. The deep red color of the howler itself suggests the fury with which Mrs. Weasley, Ron’s mother, wrote the letter. It’s clear that the delivered message is not going to be pleasant.

“Ronald Weasley!”

From the get-go, Mrs. Weasley addresses her audience. This scolding is for Ron and Ron alone. Moreover her tone, for instance referring to her son as ‘Ronald’ rather than ‘Ron’, reflects her displeasure with him.

“How dare you steal that car?!?”

Here Mrs. Weasley asks Ron a rhetorical question, using it, rather than to get a reply, to persuade Ron to consider her viewpoint.

“Your father’s facing an inquiry at work, and it’s entirely you fault!”

Again Ron’s mother continues her formal tone by referring to Mr. Weasley rather than ‘dad’. Claiming that her husband’s inquiry is entirely Ron’s fault, Mrs. Weasely aims to give Ron guilt, or involve him emotionally.

“If you put another toe out of line, we’ll bring you straight home!”

Mrs. Weasley’s use of a hyperbole emphasizes her point to Ron. It is not meant to be taken literally as there is no line to be physically crossed, but it is meant to express her great displeasure with Ron and her willingness to further punish him if he misbehaves again.

In the wizarding world of Harry Potter, Howlers are used to deliver a message of anger or great displeasure “in a manner which standard writing cannot adequately convey.”¹ In my opinion, if using rhetoric correctly, perhaps such a thing would not be necessary. Mrs. Weasley’s voice, however, sure is effective. Ron was intimidated, as was I!

¹http://harrypotter.wikia.com/wiki/Howler

Passing with Flying Colors

I cannot think of one building on Penn State's campus that doesn’t have at least one bulletin board strewn with flyers and posters vying for every passerby’s attention. The boards are always busy and, most of the time, none of the bulletin board itself can be seen.

Each flyer uses its own rhetoric. Some appeal to the college student's dreams of future success, arguing the advertised internship of job will lead them to their goal. Others appeal to the audience's logos by playing on words.

So what makes a flyer stand out in spite of the fierce and crowded competition? What makes the onlooker stop and read into a particular flyer's details?

Perhaps it is color. Messages printed on fluorescent paper seem to radiate off of the board. Looking at this board (pictured below) I immediately see hot pink, turquoise and neon yellow. As a result, all others seem to fade into the background.

Perhaps repetition is more effective. Scanning over the cluttered board, my eyes are drawn to the similarities. Upon further investigation I can see a particular flyer has been repeatedly stapled to the board. This in turn makes the leaflet stand out—had it just been another lone white flyer, my eye would have easily dismissed it while glancing at the board. But, thanks to the individual who took the time to post the same flyer a half a dozen times on the board, I took the time to read its message.

The simplicity of the flyer also determines its effectiveness. As a passerby, I don’t have the time to read every word of the dozens of flyers posted. As a result, I take the time to read those whose message I can easily grasp. In this case, the simpler flyers are the better flyers.

Looking closely, each flyer has its own font, graphics, colors and layout. No doubt thought went into making each one but there are those who use visual rhetoric to their advantage. In my opinion, those with color, repetition (yes, to the point of bombardment) and simplicity are the most effective. All others, despite efforts, tend to fade into the background.

Aragorn, King of Rhetoric

A huge fan of The Lord of the Rings trilogy-- I believe they are one of the most epic trilogies written in the past century.

Written by J.R.R Tolkein and published in the 1950’s, more than 150 million copies of the epic high fantasy trilogy have been sold¹. In 2001, the trilogy was adapted for film. The productions became highly successful and won 11 Oscars, including “Best Picture”, “Best Original Score”, and “Best Adapted Screenplay”.

In one of the last scenes of the third and final film of the series, Aragorn, King of Gondor, and his army stand facing the gates of Mordor, from which thousands of orcs (in this case the bad guys) are marching toward Aragorn and his visibly frightened army. The sheer size of the enemy is foreboding. With the use of rhetoric, King Aragorn delivers a compelling speech to counter the intimidating enemy and encourage his terrified army.

Aragorn is a king who has fought valiantly at a number of momentous battles, including the battle of Helm’s Deep and of Minas Tirith, each consisting of thousands of deaths at the price of defending the world of men. At these Aragorn exhibited his leadership and bravery. Standing before his men at the gates of Mordor, King Aragon thus exudes great ethos. If ever there was a perfect man to deliver an inspiration al speech to these frightened soldiers, Aragorn was certainly the man.

He begins his address by saying:

“Sons of Gondor! Of Rohan! My brothers!”

By referring to the soldiers as “my brothers”, King Aragorn puts himself, despite his incredible ethos, on their level. This makes it easier for Aragorn to relate to his audience. They are all sons, all brothers. He and his army are in this foreboding battle together, not as King and his soldiers, but as those standing together to defend the world of men.

Aragorn continues his efforts to rhetorically gain the army’s approval saying, “I see in your eyes the same fear that would take the heart of me.” It seems as if Aragorn is trying to prove that he, like his soldiers, is simply a mortal scared for his life. Here he conveys that he understands the fears of this army but is willing to fight despite them. Having related to his audience, Aragorn implies that, despite initial doubts, they are capable of gathering the courage to fight valiantly and succeed, just as he has in the past.

Having related to his audience and instilled in them the idea that they are capable of doing the far-fetched, Aragorn continues his rhetoric with pathos.

“By all that you hold dear on this good Earth…”

Aragorn is reminding them that more than their lives are at stake with this battle—losing the fight could mean the destruction of the world of men and everything they hold dear. Here, Aragorn is appealing to their fears, emotionally engaging his audience.

Finally, Aragorn uses exigence— calling his army to action.

“I bid you STAND, men of the West!”

King Aragorn has established himself and related to his audience through ethos, appealed to their fears and thus involving them emotionally, and finally he calls them to action, or to fight against the oncoming enemy. In this scene a problem has been presented and Aragorn is calling upon his audience, the army, to act upon it.

Quickly being approached by thousands of orcs, the odds may have seemed unfavorable for the army, but thanks to King Aragorn’s use of rhetoric, the men recovered their courage to fight. The ensuing scenes are a testament to Aragorn’s effective use of rhetoric. And, although Aragon did use rhetoric effectively, in my opinion it also helped that there was inspirational music playing for him in the background.

¹ http://www.waterstones.com/waterstonesweb/displayProductDetails.do?sku=5007234

Mocha: To Treat or Not to Treat?

The other day I was walking down my usual path through Penn State’s HUB. Nonchalantly looking around, to my left, just outside of Starbucks, my eye caught poster advertising a Starbucks beverage.

Just one of perhaps hundreds of advertisements that I read or see every week, this promotion managed to catch my attention. What first struck me were the ad’s words:

Treat Yourself to a

handcrafted Mocha.

It’s the perfect balance of rich

cocoa and espresso.

Or try our NEW skinny mocha—

110 calories in a tall.

Treat yourself:

This implies that I have worked hard or did something significant enough to deserve a reward. I feel flattered by this comment. It’s not every day that someone recognizes the hard work I do, and I don’t care if it’s an indirect compliment coming from an impersonal banner outside of Starbucks, I’ll take what I can get!

Saying ‘treat’ suggests that Starbucks is selling a treat, something that will give me, or any other consumer, great pleasure. From the get go, this poster is telling those who see it that what Starbucks is promoting is special.

Handcrafted:

This beverage isn’t just made, it’s crafted. This word implies that the drink was made skillfully by a barista who takes time and care to create a quality drink for the customer. It detracts from the fact that it is most likely a college student who is trying to earn some extra cash at a part-time job that is making the drink. ‘Handcrafted’ thus suggests that Starbucks takes pride in skillfully making beverages for its customers. The word also suggests that these drinks are pieces of art.

But what is a Mocha anyway? Following this train of thought, right below the first two lines, the advertisers give observers a definition:

It’s the perfect balance of

rich cocoa and espresso.

Perfect:

Of course, Starbucks would never give its customer anything less than the best. The customer is worth this cup of ‘handcrafted’ perfection.

           

Balance:

It’s interesting that they should use this word rather than blend. Creating balance requires precise measurement. To me, Starbucks is suggesting that it took great pains to make this beverage perfect. As a customer, I have the privilege of benefitting from the fruits of their labor or, perhaps more fittingly, benefitting from the drink of their labor.

Rich:

This gives the drink texture. Perhaps the onlooker could smell a Mocha from the nearby coffee shop or see the final product pictured below on the sign, but now they can feel the beverage in their mouths. This word also correlates to the earlier implication that a Mocha is a luxury.

           

NEW:

The capitalized ‘NEW’ is important and exciting, calling attention to all those who read the ad. Starbucks is trying to excite its potential customers and, after feeling proud and confident from the earlier implied statement, perhaps they will decide they are feeling spunky enough to try one!

           

Skinny:

The Mocha is not just thin, it’s skinny! This word choice is more extreme and thus more outrageous, calling attention to how low in calories the skinny mocha is. It’s a much catchier title than ‘low-fat’.

           

The overall soft brown look of this ad reflects the warm coffee-shop atmosphere that Starbucks generally exudes. The white whipped cream on top of the drink looks fluffy and artistic. Meanwhile I’m fairly certain that I’ve never seen a customer walk away from Starbucks with a mug like that shown in the advertisement. All the same, the ad’s look does a good job of emphasizing the warmth of the drink and what a Mocha is.

In just 26 words, the ad encapsulates many appeals to the viewer. Seeing this advertisement, I felt complimented, curious, enlightened and drawn in to the ad’s message. Alas, although the ad was able to make me think about the product and feel a variety of emotions, it did not convince me enough to actually try the Mocha. I decided not to treat myself, but what about you?

Big Box Mart

One of my favorite types of rhetoric is satire. More specifically, I love how it means using clever humor to get a point across to the audience. JibJab, a digital entertainment studio, is known for its witty uses of satire. The studio creates satiric videos criticizing politicians or past events. My personal favorite JibJab video is “Big Box Mart.”

This video is drenched with satire. From the smog-filled Beijing to the house bursting with stuff, JibJab makes use of burlesque, parody and exaggeration.

For each character, the heads of photographed people have been cut off and pasted onto disproportional bodies. All of them are the same height and have stiff movements, making them more comical.

The characters’ stiff gestures move in tempo to the parody of “Oh Susanna!”, a classic 19^th century American song. This folk ballad, recognizable to most Americans, reinforces that the clip’s content is criticizing what’s going on in America.

Rather than using a tone as serious as the topic, the song has an upbeat tempo that contrasts to the troubling phenomena being described in the clip. By doing this, JibJab is using irony. It puts the context of the message in a humorous light but continues to highlight the dismal truth reflected through the parodied lyrics.

Along with the comical-looking people and parodied American classic, JibJab makes use of exaggeration. Beijing in a smog-filled city of factories, America’s countryside is filled with billboards, the main character’s shopping cart is overloaded with stuff, and Big Box Mart has over 90 isles.

The visual exaggerations play off of stereotypes of American consumerism. The man claims he has “lots of needs” and proceeds to place a yard gnome in his bright red cart. He pulls out 7 credit cards while pushing his overloaded cart. His wife is pressed against a window of their house because there’s simply not enough room inside because of all of the things they bought from Big Box Mart.

The exaggeration continues as “American Industries Est. 1776” is shut down as it can’t compete with cheap foreign labor. The man can now no longer afford retirement and now must “scrub toilets until they put [him] in the grave.” Not all of American industries have been shut down and not all those who have lost their jobs will be forced to scrub toilets for the rest of their lives. To say the least, these are major exaggerations. Yet, despite the humor found in the amplifications, JibJab is emphasizing a sad truth—cheap foreign labor is hurting some Americans, leaving them in sad situations. This man’s however, it overly pathetic.

To me, JibJab’s over exaggeration is humorous while still being effective at delivering its message.  I for one would prefer to not like to work for a place like Big Box Mart, thus:

‘Oh Big Box Mart, no don’t you cry for me. I come from Happy Valley where I will get my degree!’

ASPCA Pathos

This week the theme is pathos—or appeals to the audience’s emotions.  According to Aristotle, in order to effectively use pathos, the rhetor must 1.) understand the state of mind of emotional others, 2.) know who can excite emotions in people, and 3.) understand the reasons for becoming emotional. As an audience member, perhaps one of the most effective examples of pathos is the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals’ (ASPCA) commercial promotion featuring Sarah McLachlan and her hit Angel.

Animal cruelty is a rather grim subject, but rather than allowing the unpleasant topic discourage possible endorsers, the ASPCA uses it to their advantage by appealing to the hearts and emotions of good-willed people. By understanding the state of mind of the audience, the ASPCA can take an appropriate to address the audience.

Determining an appropriate approach, the ASPCA also considers who can most effectively evoke the audience’s emotions. Rather than featuring healthy humans in no obvious need of support, the commercial presents rescued animals, each more pitiful than the previous. The wide eyes or, in the case of one cat, eye and feeble legs emphasize the animals’ helplessness and, perhaps more importantly, aims to tug at the hearts of the audience.

Coinciding with the woeful animals is Sarah McLachlan’s song Angel, its tempo slow and tone soft. And while its sound reflects the somber nature of animal cruelty, its lyrics also help to portray the ASPCA’s message.

Starting off the commercial with “in the arms of an angel,” the song corresponds to a dog being held in the arms of an ASPCA member. Having been through a rough and abusive past, the mistreated dog is in need of an angel or someone who is willing to help through the ASPCA.

Assuming they’ve effectively appealed to the audience’s pathos through the featured animals, the audience is perhaps wondering how they, too, can become an angel and help the unfortunate animals. Luckily Sarah McLachlan is there to tell the audience how they can help through the ASPCA. If the animals have caused the audience to become emotional, then perhaps they’ll want to help them, allowing the ASPCA to make use of kairos—the opportune time to call the audience into action and donate to the ASPCA.

This commercial appeals to my emotions. I become moved at the sight of mistreated animals and want to open my heart and home to them. It’s worked in the past too! Thanks to appeals to pathos, I have adopted two cats!

My family and I adopted our cats Ella (top) and Marvin (bottom) thanks to appeals to pathos!

The 2012 Rhetoric Apocalypse

The Super Bowl is famed for not only some of the best football of the year, but also for its memorable commercials. For 30 seconds and $3.5 million, advertisers have the chance to persuade their audience, roughly 110 million viewers¹, to buy the product advertised. Needless to say, much rhetoric is used to accomplish this.

One of the commercials that stuck out to me this Super Bowl was Chevy Silverado’s Apocalypse of 2012 advertisement. From the colors to the context of the commercial, rhetoric was rampant.

From the beginning the viewer can sense that immense destruction has occurred. The ruined city is void of color, except for an occasional yellow from fire that burn among broken bicycles and fallen streetlights. The destruction of the Mayan-predicted 2012 apocalypse has taken its toll.

Suddenly, among boulders that resemble an old freeway, a sign of life! —Or at least the roar of an engine. All at once the music turns from being a somber trumpet (reminiscent of Taps) to an upbeat song reflecting the truck and owner’s survival despite the apocalypse.

As the Chevy Silverado drives through the ruined city, past a burning Big Boy, crashed UFO and decapitated electric giant, one can’t help but be amazed that this truck could endure all of the surrounding destruction. It must be one tough truck!

Finally the owner congregates with others who have other models of the Chevy Silverado. And where is Dave? He “didn’t drive the longest-lasting, most dependable truck on the road” and therefore did not make it.

It’s clear that Chevy is trying to argue that, unlike other more unreliable brands, Chevy’s trucks will go the distance with their owners. Chevy also seems to be emphasizing a bandwagon—Dave didn’t have a Chevy, so Dave missed out of being with his friends.

The music used by Chevy also emphasizes the dependability of the Silverado. By first evocating Taps, a musical piece typically played during flag ceremonies and funerals, and then shifting to Barry Manilow’s Looks Like We Made It which suggests accomplishment, Chevy is insinuating that the Silverado is tougher than any adventure.

All in all, between the music, images and dialogue, this commercial used effective rhetoric in a clever way. Here is to hoping that an apocalypse does not occur, or that if it does, those of us with vehicles other than Chevy’s will survive! 

¹http://www.forbes.com/sites/avidan/2012/02/07/super-bowl-ads-take-the-money-and-run/

Super Bowl XXXVIII: exposed and extremely kairotic

Exigency; an urgent need for change.  When I think back on the events that have led to an audience to call for change, one incident stands out in particular—the infamous Janet Jackson wardrobe malfunction of Super Bowl XXXVIII.

Jackson’s risqué halftime performance with former lead singer of N’Sync Justin Timberlake included scantily clad backup dancers in a mash up of Jackson’s songs followed by Timberlake’s “Rock Your Body”. The dance involved Timberlake following Jackson around the stage, pausing occasionally to dance rather suggestively. By the last lyrics, “bet I’ll have you naked by the end of this song,” the two stood center stage and Timberlake proceeded to pull off part of Jackson’s costume. The result? In front of millions watching from the stadium and television Janet Jackson exposed A LOT of cleavage.

Voilà, exigence! Here was an incident calling for change, and the public responded kairoticly. The 2004 halftime show led to widespread debate on perceived indecency in broadcasting. On the same day the Parents Television Group (PTG) issued a statement condemning the halftime show. Meanwhile the Federal Communications Commission received almost 540,000 complaints from Americans¹.

Following the complaints and condemnations, steps toward change began to take place. The Federal Communications Commission levied a record $550,000 fine against CBS, whose network was airing the live performance, and raised an overall FCC fine per indecency from $27,000 to $325,000. In 2005, New York Times columnist Frank Rich argued that censorship on television was becoming more prevalent because of the incident.

Indeed, daytime soap operas began to be wary of suggestive content and some networks even established regulations for live broadcasts requiring time delays of up to 5 minutes. Here was an incident that called for to the audience for change and they responded. Through complaints, both oral and written, this incident became one of rhetorical exigence. What’s more, thanks to kairos, the declining morality of broadcasting was brought to the forefront of the news.

With all of this change, what did the 2005 Super Bowl Halftime Show consist of? Paul McCartney on the stage playing his guitar and fully clad.

¹http://www.usatoday.com/money/2005-01-20-bowl-cover_x.htm

I Believe In Making Toffee

http://www.personal.psu.edu/kcg5105/blogs/thisibelieve.mp3

Rhetoric, White and Blue: President Obama's State Of The Union Address

On the evening of January 24, 2012, President Obama gave the annual State of the Union address. Speaking in front of Congress, President Obama also addressed the present distinguished guests and millions of ‘fellow Americans’ watching the televised event. Now that’s an audience!

Listening to the president’s delivery, I tuned into the rhetoric used in his speech, from the words spoken to the very delivery itself. I recognized a number of techniques, such as his use of pauses and the organization of his speech, but what also really struck me was his effective use of the word ‘we’.

Of course, President Obama is referring to Americans and he himself is an American, but I couldn’t help noticing how the frequent use of the word ‘we’ in his speech puts himself on the same level as the average American. By using this pronoun, the President of the United States identifies with the audience rather than alienating himself from them.

Listening to his speech, it is clear that the President kept his audience’s concerns in mind, addressing the topics most concerning to Americans, including the weakened economy, education system, unemployment rate, and illegal immigration. And while it seems appropriate that he address the audience’s concerns about the nation, I couldn’t help but feel as if he was also speaking as a presidential candidate rather than as a president. It was as if he had a checklist of topics he wished convey to potential voters.

Throughout the speech, President Obama acknowledges the setbacks that have struck America, as well as the developments made and the expected improvements America has the potential to accomplish. He keeps his speech positive, saying, “If the playing fields are level I promise you America will always win.” Once again appealing to the audience, President Obama speaks of America’s potential to succeed rather than any imminent failures. No American wants to hear bad news.

The president makes use of specific examples, such as “in the last 22 months, businesses have created more than 3 million jobs.” Using such statistics makes the president’s speech more credible the use of empirical evidence appeals to the modern audience.

Overall I thought that the president’s address blended well both appeals to emotion and rational through the use of ‘we’ and his specific examples. Here’s to hoping that next year’s State Of The Union Address is just as good or better, both in terms of delivery and in content. 

Transcript for President Obama's State Of The Union Address

Easy, Breezy, Ethos: Covergirl Rhetoric

I was watching “Say Yes to the Dress” the other day when, during one of the commercial breaks, a Covergirl advertisement aired featuring Sofía Vergara, also known as Gloria from the comedy series “Modern Family.” At first I watched the commercial at face value, and then I realized that it used a great deal of rhetoric.

Our “Rhetoric and Civil Life” textbook defines ethos as a concept developed by Aristotle a rhetor’s character. That being said, the ethos employed in this commercial is evident.

Here in this commercial is a comical, famous and, perhaps more importantly, beautiful woman speaking on behalf of a company that sells beauty products. She looks radiant with her glamorous hair and tailored white suit. No one can question her beauty, whether natural or airbrushed. Consequently, it seems that she should be qualified to tell others what would make them beautiful as well.

Sofía starts off by speaking to the audience in a conversational tone, as if she’s just another friend ready to give away one of her most powerful beauty secrets, which, as it turns out, is that she would “never go out without [her] Covergirl (product).” She follows by claiming to the audience, “All you need is three little things to make beauty powerful for you!” No surprise, these “three little things” are Covergirl products.

And while I personally may not care for the foundation to make me look young, as a young adult I do take heed to the claim that I can use the Covergirl products to make beauty powerful for me. If I use these products, perhaps I, too, will become naturally more beautiful like Sofía. I’ll take her advice. She is, of course, both successful and beautiful.

Proctor and Gamble effectively chose their audience as I saw their advertisement while watching “Say Yes to the Dress” on TLC. The audiences watching the show are most likely feminine in nature—I have yet to hear a male voluntarily say that he enjoys dress shopping, let alone watching someone else dress shop.

So not only does the company make sure that they have a believable speaker, but they also aim well at their target audience. Ergo, I conclude that Proctor and Gamble uses rhetoric effectively in this Covergirl commercial. Perhaps others will buy their message as well or, at the very least, their product.

Welcome!

Welcome to my rhetoric and civic life blog for my spring LA 101H class!