Dear Colleagues,
I would like to start a group to consider changing the dismissive treatment of rhetoric in colloquial situations to reflect that people become experts in crowd persuasion. If there were a column in--say--the NYT on just how rhetoric is used by "influencers," then people can see it coming and have sales resistance.
Any thoughts on how to interest the media in the validity and desirability of such a project?
I look forwards to your comments.
Genuine rhetoric works not necessarily through persuaders
but through the acceptance of ideologies. Releasing people from their emotional and intellectual dependence is the key, often done (to an extent) through the denial of the truth of the rhetoric. Something they rarely hear.
The media are the industry of manipulation. Their aim is to persuade, not to inform. Rhetoric is not important; what matters are selective reporting and plain lies.
Dear colleagues Mario Radovan and Stanley Wilkin,
Thanks for sharing your ideas here.
I'd agree that the media have no concept of rhetoric, although by grabbing hold of a single issue and connecting it to rhetorical constructs of race, for example, within a spate of negatives they are employing it. Degraded or not. But that is how many people want knowledge.
Dear Stanley,
Thank you for your, as usual, thoughtful approach to discussions.
I think people can sometimes surprise us. Anyone who has taught for a couple or few decades tends to adopt the audience model of "least mental effort wanted" but remember that all that is accessible in print and online major newspapers actively promotes this model. Some experimental columns in our local newspaper as in bringing in a more in-depth approach did rather well.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/318926032_Framing_Analysis_How_to_Conduct_a_Rhetorical_Framing_Study_of_the_News
https://www.gvsu.edu/cms4/asset/2EF13597-D42F-119E-4BC17F1486F70448/losey__kurthen_-_the_rhetoric_of_political_correctness_in_the_u.s._media_1995.pdf
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Comment