Touro Communication Club Notes #44

tourocommunicationclub.blogspot.com

Well, the first 2008 Presidential Debate is history. Both sides are claiming victory. There were no gaffes or major missteps. Many people thought McCain and Obama debated to a draw. Although both Senators used exaggerations, hyperbolic statements, stretching the truth, quotes out of context, it would take an expert to figure out the precision of their statements.

From a communication viewpoint, I’ve become concerned with several factors.

1. The polls continue to show a neck-and-neck horse race. In the remaining days before the election on Tuesday, November 4^th, little things could assume magnified importance and become “game-changers.” Oddly, the financial crisis looms over the election, but seems mysteriously separated from the contest

2. Regardless of what the candidates say, the polls indicate that the voters are holding their positions. That implies that the voters are emotionally steadfast in their support of their candidates.

3. This leads me to observe that no argument is ultimately persuasive, if the voter has made up his/her mind. My frequent observation is that “Emotion trumps reason, especially in crisis.” I begin to doubt that ANYTHING can be taught “reasonably” if emotion is so dominant.

4. I also begin to wonder how to teach my students how to listen critically when so much of the speech-making is full of factual manipulation. How does a person with little or no specific evidence figure out whether the speaker is distorting the facts. How can anyone recognize “spin” or a manipulation of the truth is being thrown at them? Despite my feeble efforts, I still dunno – yet.

5. Lastly, the phrase “You don’t have a second chance to make a first impression” is certainly true in politics as it is in job interviews. Aristotle’s “ethos” seems to dominate “logos” and “pathos” Personality can be more important than substance.

In the coming weeks, we have a chance to take a close observation of two political campaigns – one fictional (“The20Candidate”) and one factual dramatization (“Recount”) As we watch both films, observe the strategic and tactical manipulation that both sides employ to win the election. “The Great Debaters” dramatizes the enormous effort that debaters experience as they prepare for the most demanding intellectual combat.

Here's our schedule:

Thursday, October 2 , 2008 – 2 pm – Room 610 – Theatre – We will discuss the range of possible activities we could explore in this new component. We should close with some elementary acting exercises. There are so many aspects of the theatre that can enhance everyone’s presentation.

Tuesday, October 7, 2008 – 2 pm – Room 226 The film “The Candidate” (1973) with Robert Redford. This Oscar winning script takes a biting look at the nature of politics.

After the film, we’ll discuss the many aspects of Robert Redford’s experience running for office, the “handling” of the candidate, the opposing messages and the impact of Redford’s “pretty boy” looks toward stacking the outcome. Most importantly, the final scene make strong editorial comment about what a candidate is going to do once elected.

What happened on September 24, 2008 – Discussing the Politics of the Election

Somehow I didn’t get the sign-in sheet. So I will have to guess at who was there Richard Green. Olushile Akintade, James Millner, Brian Brown, Amina Bibi were there when Hal Wicke, George Backinoff, Lorinda Moore and Jason Carvell arrive from a Faculty Development meeting.Marcus Vay ndorf has already left. If I missed others, I’ll include them in the next notes.

As near as I could deduce from the excitement in the air about the discussion, the large group had a productive discussion. Richard who galvanized the discussion has printed Chapter 11of the debate text he uses at Avenue J entitled, “Logic is Not Enough: Use other Sources of Persuasion, too.”

In the discussion one term stood out. Senator Joe Biden was frequently accused of “logorrhea.” Defined as excessive talking, one jokester called it “Diarrhea of the mouth.”

Some of the issues I gleaned included:

• There was a clash of speaking styles between McCain and Obama. McCain’s short punchy sentences contrasted with Obama’s longer sentences. (One of the rhetorical complaints about Senator Kerry in the 2004 election was that he spoke in “paragraphs” while George Bush delivered “bumper-sticker” sentences. (Do people listen to paragraphs?)
• There were abundant comments about the candidates delivering lies, counter-lies, distortions, mis-representations, stretching the facts,
• Many sound bites seem ed ot be persuasive.
• The 1960 debate between Nixon and Kennedy – the first in television history- demonstrated how pretty looks trumped substance. George Backinoff commented on how an audiotape demonstrated how much more substantive Nixon’s presentation was, yet on television people noticed his scowl and his five-o’clock shadow.
• People seem to live in a bubble. Do election issues ever reach them?

The conversation could have continued far beyond our time. As people were leaving Amina raised the issue of the recent Pakistani bombings and her concern that nothing much had appeared in the media. She wanted to organize some kind of political protest action. After many suggestions from Jason, George, Lorinda,. Hal suggested that she write up a proposal that the club would discuss at our next gathering.

Next time, the club will begin alternating between general topics in communication, debate and the theatre/drama.

These sessions continue to be open for everyone to attend. Bring a friend and join in the excitement. See you next time.

Hal Wicke