XC-Communication

Each National and State Election exhibits a tremendous amount of persuasive communication. Two years ago, each candidate for the President of the United States attempted to persuade the country to vote for them through speeches, debates, rallies and advertising. With midterm elections coming up, Senators, House Representatives and Governors are also trying to persuade voters as are former and current POTUS.  Without getting political, find or listen to some advertising, talks or debates.  Then review the section on Persuasive Communication in the textbook and in a paragraph or less, explain how these candidates for public office (local, state, or national) use persuasive communication to influence. Tie it to what you learned in the text.

16 Comments for “XC-Communication”

jhschnering

says:

Our politicians use methods of communication to persuade us. I viewed one of Ben Carson’s rallies in South Carolina for the 2016 election. While watching the video, I was going back and forth in the book to try and tie concepts to the video. While doing so, I realized that Ben Carson speaks from a low-context culture. I felt that everything he was saying was just as important even though I was not watching the video the entire time and I was just listening to it. Ben also had to have channel richness. During his time at the rally, he had to put as much information in roughly an hour as possible to convey his point to the people. The more information given, the highly likelihood that people are willing to be persuaded by him.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TqncpUYE88k

Tyler J Cline

says:

During watching some of these political campaigns they are using their tone of the language and persuading the people to vote for them. They get normal people to talk about the candidate in good terms and making them look like they couldn’t do anything wrong. In the first video, I watched on YouTube I noticed the man building a gun. What does that gun have to do with running the state that he is trying to represent? Nothing but, he’s trying to get people that support his cause on his side. Persuasion is a huge part of being a good politician and showing that you are good leader. All leaders have the quality to persuade people to get behind them and work.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ffRl9L-vBrI

bherbert2

says:

When watching this little video that I saw was on Elizabeth Warren. During the speech, I saw many instances where she did use persuasive communication to reach a level where the audience would side with her than her opposer. During the beginning of the speech, she opened up with jokes to get the audience laughing before starting her speech. Using this method I believe she used emotion as our textbook says that we will interpret a message differently when we are happy or sad. Using positive emotion the audience was happy by laughing and engaged more with the speaker. Also, during the speech the speaker also used filtering around 1:30 the speaker used only bad statistics about the other person she is possibly running against and used these bad things this other person does to manipulate the audience in feeling that this other individual is a bad person. It shows that in today’s elected official races that it involves a lot of persuading the audience in showing that why they are better than the other person. Persuasion is always going to be here and it will always be difficult for the receiver to interpret the message correctly and look for the facts and leave emotions out of it.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/sen-elizabeth-warren-has-become-a-master-of-the-stump-speech/2014/10/28/acfee026-5e0e-11e4-8b9e-2ccdac31a031_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.b44adc9607af

Jami

says:

I listen to the listed debates from the other students and then chose a different one. No matter which politician you choose to listen to they all have persuasive actions. They lead you into the conversations and pull out the points that you want to hear and discuss. Just like buttering you up to lead you to pull on their side. Persuasion is not noticeable unless you go into the conversation or demonstration pulling out the points that lead the crowd. Every rally will have its draw in points depending on which state you are in, some states can use the same points. Using tone and presentation is another leading factor. Building up the crown on what you can offer and what they want to hear. To all politicians stop offering and do it. It’s time to prove what they say they are all going to do. I’m not saying some of them haven’t, but a lot of the time it is unkept promises. Just my opinion to all the rally videos I watched.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oa9t7qjEptM

jmcounts

jmcounts

says:

Make America Great Again rallies are a strong example of persuasive communication during this Midterm Election of 2018. During the Presidential Race of 2016, The Honorable Donald J. Trump held Make America Great Rallies, MAGA, across the country which helped push his agenda and increase popularity. Following the elements of our text for persuasive communication, we can say politicians know exactly what they are doing. Prior knowledge hurt President Trump’s reputation with social issues such as women’s, minorities’, and special needs rights. Prior knowledge also helped him because of his background in business and people did not see him as a corrupt politician.

Major issues like the current undocumented migrant caravan of thousands of persons attempting to gain entry into the United States seems to be split. A divided interest level between views of it being an, “invasion and national security risk”, while others view it as, “simple refugees”, shows how mixed opinions are. Controlled processing is one of those methods that will determine which way swing states and voters will go.

President Trump is a strong example of how personality, message characteristics, and automatic processing can benefit a candidate. Being a charismatic leader is shown to rally support and excite the crowd. As both political parties rally for a majority in the US Senate and House of Representatives, rallying support with divided voters will be the same as normal.

https://www.foxnews.com/midterms-2018

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/some-watchwords-for-silly-season

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2018/11/01/migrant-caravan-mexico-president-donald-trump-honduras-us-mexico-border-troops-immigration/1843469002/

clsmith24

says:

After watching the 2018 Alaska Gubernational debate for Governor, both Mark Begich and Mike Dunleavy were given a minute to share their campaign before the debate started. Within both of their speeches they used persuasive speech to advertise what they stand for. In both of their campaigns I can see the aspect of persuasive speech the book talks about in interest level. They both brought up situations that affect all Alaskans such as the PFD. The book shares that individuals are more likely to process information carefully when they are going to be impacted by the outcome. Starting out the campaign by stating how they are going to help the citizens of Alaska ensure the listeners will pay more attention to their campaign. Another aspect of persuasion the politicians use is what the book states as choosing the message. They both made sure they talk about real and relevant issues that a lot of Alaskan’s are emotionally invested in, and associate their campaign with the peoples’ positive outcome. In doing so they show that they are knowledgeable in the area of politics, and show the people that they care for their outcome.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_r5NAz3ZaOQ

bbell19

bbell19

says:

I chose to review Alyse Galvin’s campaign video for this assignment. One video in particular from her website, https://www.alyse4alaska.com, showcased a parade of “average Alaskans” proclaiming their need for safety and the reassurance that Galvin cares about Alaskans. Galvin herself has a short snippet where she speaks directly to the camera, using very slow speech to convey a strong emotional attachment and elicit interest in her dedication to safety across the state. This message is accompanied by a hashtag that steps it up from a basic lean communication channel as there is a place to comment or interact via social media. The slogan focuses on safety and, from the video, seems to be a major platform for Galvin. Overall, I would categorize Galvin’s advertising as targeting an automatic processing audience because the emotional emphasis and the repetition of its message, even with the effort to extend an open means of communication through social media.

negentzwilkins

says:

I agree…I have watched several ads in support of Galvin. Many of them reach the audience at an emotional level. She shows empathy, compassion, and connection – if anyone is successful in beating Young after all of the years he has been successful it may just be Galvin.

Josh Petersen

says:

The video I watched was a campaign ad for Barack Obama I believe while he was running for his second term as president. In this section of the book it talks about automatic processing and how people usually process like this due to the fact that it is easier than going out and doing work to find the facts and use controlled processing. Basically in this video Barack is talking about making the rich pay more in taxes and ending the war in Afghanistan. He is feeding into basic ideas and our automatic processing that he knows sound good to the majority of the public to get the vote. I believe a lot of political people use this tactic and feed off of hot topics that they feel will get our vote if they say that they are for the popular idea. For the majority of people they use automatic processing to make quick decisions like this. https://youtu.be/3ZJ5K0zo7dc

rcskieens

says:

I watched a short video on YouTube about a community member of Eagle River, Alaska that is running for the state Senate. The setting of the video appears to be casual and it displays the candidate assembling what appears to be an AR-15. The candidate is to the point and communicates what the problems are and that he will address them. He mentions what he learned in the Marines which was to “lead, follow or get out of the way” he stated that he is here to lead. As the reading would suggest, it’s about relating to the audience in some aspect to get support. Alaska being a pro hunting and pro firearms state, this candidate is using his experience and knowledge with firearms as credibility to gain the support of viewers. He also added in his past experience with the military which most people associate with being structured and dedicated to providing a service. These small actions and comments are all attempts of persuading the public for what he beliefs in and to ultimately get their vote.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eRGXgU5Qt24

mswalker

mswalker

says:

The candidate that I chose is Alyse Galvin. Just the fact that she has been the most successful challenger to Don Young is an accomplishment in itself. I have already formed my opinion of her, but the video that I watched reinforces my thoughts. She stands for what a lot of young adults and those of us who are considered middle-aged find important. Standing for social security, better education with smaller classrooms, and bringing fresh ideas to congress. What this ad has shown is Don Young is a arrogant, crass, rude and some may say downright ignorant in regards to the way he speaks to people. He comes across as appearing to think less of women. This ad has shown me that I have made the right decision going to the polls.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yuCMgjmuPew

negentzwilkins

says:

XC – Communication
I had heard an advertisement on the radio for several weeks. It tugged on my heart strings every time I heard it.

Unitealaska.org ran an ad in accusing gubernatorial candidate Dunleavy of blocking legislation called “Bree’s Law”. Bree’s Law is a result of Bree Moore, a 20 year old young woman tragically dying at the hands of her boyfriend in a fit of dating violence. The ad portrays Walker being a hero and taking credit for the legislation while making Dunleavy out to be vicious and insensitive. The ad stated: “If he won’t stand up for our daughters, how can we ever expect him to stand up for Alaskan’s?” Not only was the ad demeaning Dunleavy but after some fact finding it was essentially re-victimizing Bree’s family.

This is a great example of how a voter might rely on automatic processing, and a political candidate persuading the public to not vote for a particular candidate. After hearing this ad for the first time, it really pulled at my emotions, made me upset and if I wasn’t a fact finder this may be an ad that would definitely persuade me to not vote for the candidate in question. One of the top contributors of Unitealaska.org was the Walker campaign.

Although the unitealaska.org website is now inactive and I was no longer able to find the video online I have included references to the ad below:
http://mustreadalaska.com/walker-begich-weaponizes-brees-death-to-savage-dunleavy/
https://mustreadalaska.com/unite-alaska-disbands-after-ugly-ad-campaign/
http://apeonline.org/the-unite-alaska-brees-law-ad/

Alden

Alden

says:

I looked for an ad on YouTube and came across one for Mike Dunleavy. The ad was focused on delivering a message about the catch and release crime bill. The ad states how Dunleavy voted against the bill and then shows a woman giving some facts about a time this past summer in which someone broke into her home and how the perpetrator ended up getting off with only a citation. I would say that this ad is based on the “choosing a message” section of persuasive communication. I believe a fair amount of people that come across ads while watching videos generally skip them or ignore them. By choosing the persuasive message, the ad has a better chance of grabbing the audience’s attention when they are not interested. Within the text it mentions that using messages that are emotional and have positive images can increase the outcome that is desired.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C7IpYf1j8wg

ajvinzant2

says:

I also watched the 2018 Alaska Gubernational debate with Mark Begich and Mike Dunleavy.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_r5NAz3ZaOQ

Both candidates recognize that they’re in a guided debate where listeners:

-are likely to have an high interest: the future of Alaska may be at stake after all.
-have prior knowledge: those watching a debate like this are more likely too have kept-up on state affairs.
-to have a high need for cognition: Seeking out debates by the candidates is a form of research.

These three factors let the candidates know they need to provide in-depth answers that can be confirmed by real facts and evidence, likewise because a recorded interview like this is low in channel richness, there is just a little bit of emotional appeal and positivity. I suppose the ability to artfully blend these two approaches—appealing both to emotion and logic—is what encompasses a truly persuasive speaker.

mjwilliams10

says:

The political ad I picked is by the 10th Congressional Democratic candidate Dan Helmer. The ad was shown on The Late Show with Stephen Colbert as the worst political ad. The video is so corny and bad that I was cringing throughout the video. The title of the ad is called the “Helmer Zone”. In the opening scene, Dan Helmer is driving a motorcycle referencing the movie Top Gun. Then, he goes into a bar wearing a shirt that says veteran, so people will know he’s an army veteran. He talks to his wing woman who sees his opponent, Congresswoman Comstock ordering a drink. Dan walks over to the congresswoman singing karaoke extremely off key. In the song, he sings about her voting against Planned Parenthood and Obamacare. Then everyone in the bar joins in on the horrendous singing. At the end of the video, the congresswoman leaves the bar. Obviously, the commercial was meant to be a joke, and Dan uses humor to create a memorable ad. One can argue that it is persuasive because it uses humor to create a positive emotion for the viewer, thus relying on viewers to use automatic processing strategies to evaluate the message rather than facts or knowledge. Dan also shows his opponent in a negative light dissuading people to vote for her. His shirt lets people know he is a veteran and he tries to give a laid back non-politician impression of himself, which may persuade people to vote for him. On the other hand, the video was embarrassing and may have backfired in giving a persuasive message depending on the audience’s perception.

Video of the political ad: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CDfhFfKSohc
Video on The Late Show with Stephen Colbert: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=blsVKk0fnkU

hjmoyle

hjmoyle

says:

Weaponizing fear is one way to persuade people and President Trump is very good at it. At the Republican Convention, Trump describes the United States as a place of crisis and with his savior- like qualities he alone can pull us out of disaster. Donald Trump has also been very vocal about immigration, particularly from Mexico. He has had parents of deceased children murdered by illegal immigrants warn about the dangers of immigrant and he used the murder of Mollie Tibbetts as a reason for harsher laws. It didn’t take me long to scroll through Trump’s Twitter account to find other example of fear as a persuasive message. Five hours ago, Trump wrote, “If you want to protect criminal aliens- VOTE DEMOCRAT. If you want to protect Law-Abiding American-VOTE REPUBLICAN!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fs0pZ_GrTy8
https://www.cnn.com/2018/08/24/politics/donald-trump-mollie-tibbetts/index.html

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *