Q3 Last post for the semester

The social constructionist model of communication is a concept that I feel needs further discussion. I had a hard time grasping this concept. The other posts gave me a better perspective of this concept but I still would refer to this concept as somewhat in the twilight zone. It is hard for me to comprehend that “most of what we know and believe about the world comes to us through communication rather than through direct experience” (Trenholm, 2008, p. 30). I guess I have to be more mindful with my perspective of this concept and realize that it does not exclude direct experience, hence the word most.

Q2 Interesting Concepts

The concepts in the class that I found most interesting were the ones the dealt with interpersonal communication. I have always found it fascinating the different stages one experiences when developing a relationship. One particular concept I found interesting was relational development: stages in intimate dyads. The paths to and from intimacy was something that I have experienced myself and I am sure many of us have. For instance, the stages of coming together consist of initiating, experimenting, intensifying, integrating, and bonding. The initiating stage involves, initial impressions, observing cues about personality, attitudes, and willingness, and open communication channels. Experimenting is where couples find common ground to build their relationship. This is where most relationships stop. An aspect of the intensifying stage could be described as the usage of “we” or “ours” and may even complete each other’s thoughts. When they become a couple in both their eyes and others this is considered the integrating stage. Bonding in couples may incorporate marriage (Trenholm, 2008, p.153 -154). I have personally gone through all of these stages and the result: marriage.

Q1 Research Method

In my opinion ethnography as a research method is the most interesting. According to Trenholm (2008), “The researcher observes behavior in its natural setting….the researcher may actually “go undercover” as a participant…the researcher avoids imposing his or her own values and assumptions on the data…he or she allows conclusions to emerge from observation.

If I were researching deception between students communication with faculty a suitable research question would be; what excuse do college students use for turning in late assignments? I would use the survey research method to question faculty. It would be easier to question the faculty with a face-to-face interview and get generalized answers to see how far students will go to make excuses for late work. It would be interesting to research the student’s perspective through ethnography and see if the findings coincide.

Q3 Need Gratification

I found the concept of need gratification interesting. The research that has been done regarding this topic is now being used “to understand how consumers use the Internet and cell phones” (Trenholm, 2008, p. 310). The earliest study mentioned was by Herta Herzog on why women listen to radio soap operas. The outcome surprised me; I didn’t consider that the listeners used the soap opera for emotional release or advice on how to deal with their own problems. The channel of communication is radio not television which makes a difference. It does kind of disturb me that these women would use the soap operas for advice. I have watched soap operas and I would not use what I see as advice. Women poison their husbands, there is usually someone black mailing someone, and someone is pregnant but not buy their husband. I don’t know if the soap operas that were listened too on the radio were like the ones we see today on television but I sure wouldn’t use them for advice.

Question 2 Marshall McLuhan

I do agree with Marshall McLuhan that the medium is the message. Trenholm (2008) states, “he was expressing the beliefs that the channel through which a message is transmitted is as important as the message itself and that the channel, in fact, often determines which messages will be transmitted and which will be ignored” (p. 307).

This leads into McLuhan’s coolness factor. The usage of U.S. Presidents in the text was helpful in understanding this. JFK is considered “cool” enough to use the channel of television. He speeches were directed toward the audience’s issues not only was it what he had to say but his looks captured the audience as well. On the other hand Richard Nixon is classified as “hotter” his approach is to “hard-edged and direct” for television and would have probably achieved higher ratings if radio was the channel for his messages to the public. McLuhan’s idea of television as a “cool medium” is correct in my opinion. In fact our current President, Obama, has the coolness factor that allows him to be effective using television as one of the channels of communication.

Cyberspace Friendships

I have to say that I have not made friendships exclusively in cyberspace. I just recently joined facebook because of the communications department. I have to say that it has put me in touch with a lot of my cousins from my father’s side of the family. We all lost touch when my parents divorced and I was 5 years old. I believe that I am still cautious with making friends exclusively in cyberspace. I guess I need that f2f relationship. My husband tells me that I read too much into a person’s body language and expressions, you know non-verbal behavior and that is something you don’t get out of the communication process in cyberspace.

Concept of Interest: Sexual Harassment

There is one concept in the book that we haven’t discussed and that is sexual harassment. I think everyone should be aware of what sexual harassment consists of: “unwelcome sexual advances, request for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature… when submission to or rejection of this conduct explicitly or implicitly affects an individual’s employment, unreasonably interferes with an individual’s work performance or creates an intimidating, hostile or offensive work environment” (Trenholm, 2008, p. 229). It is important to note that this can happen to males and females as well as being harassed by the same sex.

I found it interesting that our textbook makes note that the factors that show a higher degree of harassment are found in most colleges and universities. Some of the factors consist of “defining the normal employee as male”, “support systems for women and people of color are weak”, and “power relationships between superiors and subordinates are unequal”. I am employed at a college and I have heard of a few incidents between employees but I was surprised when I read it.

Etiquette

I have to say that I agree with the cell phone etiquette in our text. I fell that is rude when anyone engages in conversations on their cell phone when they are at the movies, out to dinner, and church services. Although, I have had dinner with some women from work and l let them know that I was expecting an important call and that I would like to sit at one of the ends of the table. I wanted to sit at the end of the table so I could easily walk away from the table when I received the call. I believe that by informing them that I was expecting a call and I need to answer it, as well as my placement in the seating arrangements it made it easier for all who attended dinner to understand why I would be on my cell phone. I also have to state like many of you that I hate it when people talk on their phones or text at the movies. It is so disruptive.
The etiquette for answering machines really should be based on the phone number. What I mean by this is that your business phone should not have jokes, weird music, or something snide recorded on it but on your personal home or cell phone it really shouldn’t matter. This is a phone that is paid by the individual not the organization.

I am probably one of the few who hates call waiting. I still have it on my phone only because my caller id will let me know who called and my phone service will automatically connect the call to my answering machine after 4 rings. Otherwise I hate it when I am trying to talk to someone and you keep hearing the beep, it’s like you feel like you have to answer it.

Conference call etiquette does make sense to some degree. I have been on a conference call with just my boss and I. He is a male and I am a female so after the first initial introduction we did not state who we are because we felt it was obvious because of the difference in tone. I do agree with the background noise and snide remarks. People need to remember that on a conference call everything that happens in the room can be hear d on the other side of the room.
I do agree the etiquette for long faxes. I have called several times to recipients to find out a good time to send a 20 page fax. I also thought it was good that the text mentions that faxes can be seen by anyone and they are not private so be careful what you fax.

The timing of communications has become very relaxed with a lot of people because of the technology available. There is a different between the time you call someone on their phone or send them an e-mail.

Screen names and ring tones can sometimes be interpreted by others as offensive or degrading. For instance, I have used sjsueducatedfool since I began SJSU. I have had both negative and positive feedback. This is not a screen name that I would use in the workplace. So it really depends on the environment the appropriateness of a screen name or ring tone.

Question 1

Organizations are tied to the environment by their location and resources to name a few. I like the example the book gives comparing living organisms to the ties organizations have to their environment. In a few of my business classes we studied location and the effects organizations have on the community such as employment and what they give back to the community. I like to compare the ties they have to ties we have to our planet. We haven’t been taking care of our planet, hence tomorrow is Earth day, we our experiences dramatic changes in temperature and extinction of species that our ecosystem needs to survive. This is just like an organization. Some organization have had to recently layoff employees which in turn slows down the economy of the community because the laid off worker can no longer purchase as many goods.

The relationship between San Jose State University and the city of San Jose is something I know little about. Once I think about it SJSU is a commuter college so the college gets a lot of out of town students attending. The university does promote economic means to the city. The ethical obligations SJSU has to its local community is to produce well educated individuals as well as recognized the connection between the city and the college and represent itself as such.

Concept that I liked

One of the concepts that I found interesting were the rules for disclosing. I never realized that there were rules to follow but after I read them they made sense. According to Townsend (2008) these are the rules for disclosure, “self disclosure is not appropriate in all relationships, consider the effect your disclosure will have on others, choose the right time and place for your disclosure, disclosures should also be related to what is happening in the here and now, disclosures should be gradual, and disclosures should be reciprocal” (p. 161- 162). The first rule is somewhat common sense. I wouldn’t tell my co-worker about an argument that I had with my mother but I would tell my husband. Sometimes however people just blab out personal information about themselves at the inappropriate time with people they know little about. Many of us have the common sense not to do this and we have the tools through education to guide us in our own communication with others. All of these rules will help increase relational skills and should be made easily accessible.

Duck's Interpesonal Attraction: Filtering Theory

It has been a while since I have had to think about the filters I used to eliminate people from consideration as potential romantic partners. As I reflect back and review Duck’s interpersonal attraction filtering theory the interaction I encountered with the opposite sex had to at least make it through the first two filters of sociological or incidental cues and interaction cues. The reason for elimination of the sociological filter is the lack of communication or as Townsend puts it “frequency of interaction”, if he doesn’t pay attention to me, he might not be that into me. As for the interaction cue I need to be able to talk to someone and the conversation flows, it needs to be easy and not uncomfortable. I have found that the more effortless it is to communicate with someone it factors into the preinteraction, in other words they become more attractive to me.

The interaction cues and cognitive cues can lead me to judge others as unattractive. These filters consist of conversation management and similarities in beliefs and values. This is where I can really find out if a person has a heart and/or is caring. But I can also find out if they have views that are so different from my own it makes them unattractive to me. The preinteraction cues can be an initial reaction that someone is unattractive but if I get to know them the superficial goes away. I guess you can tell that I have eliminated someone by preinteraction cue to only reconsider them based on interaction and cognitive cues. So I do have to say that I agree with Duck’s theory that all of the filters are relevant factors in the decision to take a relationship to the intimate level.

Rigid Role Relations

Of the three patterns (rigid complementarity, competitive symmetry, or submissive symmetry) it is my opinion that competitive symmetry would be the most difficult to change. The power struggle to be dominate can destroy a relationship, as Townsend (2008) states, “this pattern can be stressful and frustrating and can take its toll on the patience of the partners” (p.148). I have to say that this pattern can also be the most damaging. Stress and frustration lead to unhappiness, which in turn can end a relationship.

The pattern that could be the most damaging to the self-esteem of the individual involved in a relationship is the rigid complementarity. I leaned toward this pattern because if one of the individuals is tired of being submissive or in the one-down-role can it can lead to a feeling of unworthiness. In other words the individual realizes that he or she has taken on a role in the relationship that is not healthy for their self-esteem.

I didn’t mention the submissive symmetry only because the example in the book given is something that I experience all the time with my husband. We have been together for 16 years now. Deciding what to eat is a major decision in our household. From experience someone is going to get hungry enough to make a decision and then everyone will eat.

Assumption of similarity

One of the concepts from Chapter 12 that peaked my interest is assumption of similarity. Trenholm (2008) describes this concept as, “a refusal to see true differences where they exist” p. 357. The example of a smile from the text was a great example. The fact that a smile can be interpreted according to culture is something that never occurred to me. The example the text used of the different interpretations surprised me; “a smile may be interpreted as a sexual invitation or as a sign of derision…extremely impolite” (Trenholm, 2008, p. 358). I really wish the text disclosed which cultures had the different interpretations. I usually smile as a sign of friendliness or acknowledgement and never considered this universal expression to be interpreted so differently. How naive.

Rationality, Perfectibility, and Mutability premise

I have to say that I do believe in the rationality and mutability premises. Trenholm (2008) defines the premises as such: “the rationality premise – the belief that most people are capable of discovering the truth through logical analysis…the mutability premise assumes that human behavior is shaped by environmental factors and that the way to improve humans is to improve their physical and psychological circumstances” p. 353. First of all the rationality premise makes sense to me if I apply it to people; on the other hand this premise which is practiced by our government (democracy) is not always 100% correct in discovering the truth or maybe I should say a little late in discovering the truth. A great example would be our financial crisis. The example in the book regarding the mutability premise of universal education is a good one. I understand that if everyone on our planet had the opportunity to be educated it would lead to a change in not only improved human behavior but an improved planet that we live on. The perfectibility premise is one that I do not agree with. In fact it makes me think of something I would hear from a cult leader. Humans are not born in sin and that is my opinion. The statement really sent me through the roof. We are all capable of achieving goodness through effort and control but it does not mean we were born in sin. I guess I don’t consider sex to be a sin. I could just go on and on about this premise but I won’t. Maybe I interpreted the definition of perfectibility premise differently than some of you. I would really like to hear your opinion.

Creatures of our culture

I somewhat agree with anthropologist Ruth Benedict’s statement “we are creatures of our culture”. Most of our behavior is learned which in turn is developed from our upbringing. This is where our culture becomes a major factor of “who” we are and how we identify ourselves. As we grow older, I am not referring to senior citizen status, we begin to develop individualism; this is what I have experienced being raised in America. This is where we can break through the limits of our cultures. In California we have such diverse communities that it is easy to recognize the struggle members of different collectivist cultures are faced with trying to adjust to American culture and our individualism. Can we break through the limits of our cultures? I am not sure. In some ways we will always carry with us what was learned at an early age. In other ways we definitely want our own individual identity but this still incorporates some aspects of our habits, beliefs, and impossibilities.

Body Type - Nonverbal Communication

There was one section of chapter five that I did not consider as nonverbal communication and that is body type. I also learned a few new terms for different body types, such as: “endomorph (short, round, and fat), Mesomorph (average height, muscular, and athletic), and Ectomorph (tall, thin, and frail)” (Trenholm, 2008, p. 130). These terms also have different personality characteristics to go with them. Some of the descriptions consist of “content, generous, and affectionate for endomorphs, energetic, enthusiastic, and competitive for mesomorphs, and shy, serious, and sensitive for ectomorphs” (Trenholm, 2008, p. 131). To get back to body type and nonverbal communication, I never really considered the cultural norms for body type and the advantages and disadvantages with regards to romance and ones career especially when it comes to the male gender. The example in the book made me think of something I never considered and that was the height of a man and how it can lead to a better career and romance. I really never considered the height of a man in the context of nonverbal communication. I guess this was one of those ahha moments.

Cultural Differences in Nonverbal Communication

The first thing I have to state is that I am not a traveler. In fact I have only been to neighboring states of California and never out of the country. I have lived in the same city and state all of my life so I really don’t have any real life experience just what I have learned in class and from others experiences. I have heard of nonverbal communication meanings of other cultures from some of my business classes. For instance, in Saudi Arabia it is an insult to show the sole of your shoe while conducting business. Another issue of nonverbal communication that does not carry the same meaning is eye contact. In the US eye contact is positive and in Japan and Latin American is avoided to show respect. I am sure there are a lot more and I look forward to reading the other posts to gain more knowledge.

Misinterpretation of Nonverbal Communication

The misinterpretation of nonverbal communication has happened to me on occasion. It is usually what I consider the simplest gesture such as a smile that is misconstrued into some other meaning. That is actually what happened to me. I was in Las Vegas with some friends and we had our husbands with us as well. We were having lunch at the Hard Rock Café and yes we already had a few drinks (which may have intensified the miscommunication). I looked up and a guy smiled at me and I took it to be a friendly gesture and smiled back. The next thing I know we have a group of guys at our table offering to buy us more drinks. Did I forget to mention that our husbands were in the store shopping? We kindly declined and the one guy who smiled at me asked, “Why did you smile back?”. I replied that I was just being friendly. I misinterpreted his smile as just being friendly when he was actually flirting.

In order to increase the accuracy of interpreting nonverbal communication there are a few steps that can be taken. For instance, one can check the context. From the example above if I would have taken notice that we were in a bar/restaurant setting, the gentleman was sitting a table with all men, and having drinks in the afternoon; I might have been able to determine that his smile was flirting.

Equivocal Communication

In chapter 4 I found equivocal communication interesting. Trenholm (2008) describes equivocal communication as, “another term used to describe ambiguous communication, is most often used when a communicator feels trapped between two unpleasant alternatives” (p. 99). There are 3 questions to answer of hypothetical situations and how you would handle them. I actually would have dealt with 2 of the situations using equivocal communication. There are pro’s and con’s to equivocal communication. The pro is that there was a response without lying or hurting anyone’s feelings. The con is that some feel this type of communication is misleading and not honest. I tend to lean towards the pro interpretation of equivocal communication. From my own personal experience at work, if your superior asks how they did, equivocal communication is the way to go. Some may call me a coward but during this time of recession I want to keep my job.

Gender Differences in Language

I do agree that men and women use language differently. In most areas of communication the gender difference in communication has to do with the usage of language. The text gave some great examples of how we communicate differently and I have to say I have experienced these examples in my life too many times. Trenholm (2008) states, “women specialize in relationally oriented talk, whereas men specialize in task-oriented talk” (p. 91). I have been in a relationship for 15 years and I really see how the communication process between females and males is different. Just like the example given between Maria and Tom, that was our communication style in the beginning but over the years we have learned how to communicate more effectively. We actually set aside time to have long evolved detailed talks so he doesn’t feel like I am giving him the third degree. There is one thing I also have to comment on and that is the example of the men not wanting to ask for directions and the woman does. I have been in this situation so many times with my husband. I finally get it and by the way the GPS system I bought him for Christmas will probably help us a lot in this situation.

Judging and Categorizing

In my opinion it is possible to perceive others without in some way judging or categorizing them but it is very unlikely. There are methods we can use to be better prepared in our perception of others for instance being mindful. According to Trenholm, (2008) mindful processing is “when we act mindfully, we actively think about the world, creating new understandings rather than relying on old” (p. 54). I believe that many of us unconsciously use a construct referred to as chronically accessible constructs. Trenholm (2008) states, “these constructs are likely to color and bias our interpretation of others and their messages” (p.52). A method that can assist us in not judging or categorizing is called cognitive complexity. Trenholm (2008) states, “Cognitive complexity occurs when an individual has a large, rich, and varied set of personal constructs. The cognitively complex person is willing to combine seemingly contradictory characteristics in creative ways, realizing that people are not all good or all bad” (p. 52 – 53).

Concept of Context

I found the concept of context interesting. I would like to review this concept with my own experiences as a speaker. To address the concept of context, I have had the opportunity to speak to classrooms as well as a graduation. Not only was the audience different, the occasions differed as well as the message. When I am speaking to a classroom it is a small and contained. I can speak in a normal tone and the audience is there to gather information about the topic of the workshop. At the graduation the forum was open and outside with approximately 1500 people in attendance compared to 50 in the classroom. I had to speak through a microphone which meant I had to control my vocal tone and I knew it was being videotaped. Those in attendance at the graduation were there for a celebration so the message was that of pride, encouragement, and success.

Well Known Speaker - Dr. Martin Luther Jr.

The well-known speaker that I would like to consider is Dr. Martin Luther King. In my opinion Dr. King’s strongest characteristic as a speaker was the influence he had on public opinion. He also had credibility not only with his parishioners but the public in his plight for equality. As for attractiveness, yes he was an attractive man, which made it easier for people to acknowledge and pay attention to his message which attributes to his effectiveness as a speaker. In my opinion Dr. King demonstrated a power of not giving up and a determination that he recognized may not happen in his lifetime but would one day become reality of equality for all not based on race or gender. Of the three characteristics, credibility, attractiveness, and power; I believe that the strongest characteristic, if I had to choose one, would be credibility. I believe this because of the values that he demonstrated not only in his speeches but in his actions with the public. In my opinion Dr. King did not need to build ethos with regards to credibility, attractiveness, or power. This is probably why he is known as one of the greatest civil rights speakers.

The Good and The Bad Speakers

I really haven’t witnessed a famous person speaking in person. I have however, watched several speeches on television. The most recent is the President of the United States, Barack Obama. I want to describe the surroundings in which I viewed his inaugural speech. It was a big auditorium; all of the audience members were excited about this event. So the mood of the audience I was in was something I hadn’t experienced. There was something in the air that day that I just can’t describe. It was somewhat of a combination of excitement, hope, relief, and openness of what was to come. The theme of Obama’s campaign was “Change” and we were already for change and this allowed him to build community with his audience. Listening to him speak, I realized that he is a peoples president. He speaks in terms that all of his audience can comprehend which fit the occasion. I am not sure if was the atmosphere, the occasion, or actually witnessing this part of history and the words spoke from this man who is the first minority president to lead our country. I believe they are all factors because I believe I will remember this for the rest of my life.

I viewed a televised sermon from Evangelist preacher Rick Warren. I believe that it is important to mention the sermons are meant to be viewed for television. For those of you who have never heard of him let me give you a little insight. His theology is very anti-gay and last year it came out that he had engaged in asking for sexual favors from a male parishioner as well as purchasing crack cocaine. I knew this before I viewed one of his sermons. My own personal judgment had been made before I even heard him speak, my attitude, beliefs, and values that I had were a major factor of my impression of his sermon. The audience-speaker relationship had already been compromised. I also have to factor in that his sermon was filmed before all of this came out in the media. His sermon was one of the most longest and hard to endure that I have ever watched. Nothing he said made me change my views but it did make me question religion. I kept thinking what a hypocrite as I watched and listened.

Social Constructionist again

I really feel like I have to comment again on the social constructionist. I really had a hard time grasping this concept but after reading all of the posts I really feel that I have a better understanding of the concept. I have to say I am intrigued by this model. I had to remember that this is a model. In, “The Drawbacks of Models” it mentions that these models are incomplete because communication is such a complex process. The other posts helped me understand how different cultures can shape how we interpret the communication. Our beliefs and values are shaped by the communication process, if you think about it begins at a very young age.

Pragmatic perspective

The pragmatic perspective makes sense to think of communication as patterned interaction. If I am focusing only on the interaction and each step as a move that will eventually become a pattern it makes me think of how my husband greats me when he gets home from work. The first move is walking in the door and a saying, “I’m home”. I in return say, “Hi, honey how was your day”. I know it sounds corny but this is what we do and it has become a pattern.

I think Trenholm (2008) gave a great example of communication as a game with this example, “One of the factors that makes the game analogy appropriate is the interdependence of game players. Each player is affected by what another player does.” This makes sense to me because my interaction can be based on how those react to my interaction or what we can call a move in the game.

To think of communication different from a game is when we involve all the other aspects of human interaction such as personality and culture. This makes communication more intricate and personalized. The process is not as simple as I make a move you make a move.

Social Constructionist Perspective

After reading the social constructionist perspective its premise is that are world is not built through experiences but through communication. This was really hard for me to grasp because we have our own individual characteristics that make us unique. It reminds me of a saying my professor just used, “You can never walk a mile in another mans shoes”, in other words you can never experience the same thing as anyone else. According to the social constructionist perspective this is not the case.

Trenholm (2008), “According to this perspective, we construct the world through communication”. My interpretation of this statement is that we inherit who we are through past communications that have occurred through generations and we incorporate them into our culture. There is one thing that I can think of that is cultural although I am not sure which side of the family it comes from but when someone comes to visit our home they are always offered food. I didn’t realize that I do this until my husband pointed it out after we went to visit elderly relatives and they had an entire table full of food.

When I think of ideas that we talk about in our culture (American) is freedom. The irony in this statement is that so many of us take it for granted and don’t even realize that our communication would be so different if we were immersed into another culture outside of our country. I believe freedom contributes to both our happiness and success and can also contribute to our failures and sadness.

Interesting Concept from Chapter One

After reading chapter one the concept from the modern period is from the elocutionists. There study focused on the canon of delivery (Trenholm, p. 11). The vocal characteristics and gestures that appear during emotion states were exaggerated. If you didn't check out the figure on pg. 12 titled An Elocutionary Approach to the Use of "Gestures, you should. You can see the dramatization of gestures that are suppose to show an emotion in a natural state which it does not. These nonverbal behaviors were so unrealistic that it gave oral communications a bad name (Trenholm, p. 11). I can see how these writings and diagrams were disregarded, I found myself laughing as I was reading them. The elocutionists approach was suppose to (Trenholm, p. 10) "design elaborate systems of instruction to improve speakers' verbal and nonverbal presentations" but they went a little to far.

Orator - Morally Good?

I really don't agree that in order to be an orator, an individual has to morally good. An orator is considered an exceptional speaker. In this case, history has heard many great speeches that have come from many individuals that were not morally good. One that I can think of is Adolf Hitler. One of the reasons so many people followed and believed in what he was saying was because of his speeches. His intentions were morally wrong and genocide occurred. So I cannot agree with the Greeks.

The one connection that I make with the connection of goodness, truth, and public communications comes from Aristotle. Ethos which refers to personal character. An individuals personal character can be destroyed because of evil and lies. In order for an individual to continually maintain personal character they need to demonstrate goodness and truth.

Ethos, Logos, & Pathos

As I read some of the blogs Obama it is evident that he is the man of the hour. I was also going to comment on Obama but I remembered something I learned in grade school. That was the history of one of our former Presidents of the United States, John F. Kennedy. I listened to his inaugural speech from 1961; by the way I wasn’t born yet. Here is a link of the written speech - http://www.bartleby.com/124/pres56.html and here is a link from utube - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xE0iPY7XGBo and http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3s6U8GActdQ, there are two parts to the speech.

When I listened to the speech I kept in mind the definitions of ethos, logos, and pathos. Aristotle believed that these three ways could sway an audience (Trenholm, 2008). When I apply these to JFK’s inaugural speech I believe that of the three; logos is the most pertinent. This is my opinion because of a statement that has been continually referred to over time and that is, “ask not what your country can do for you—ask what you can do for your country” (Bartleby.com). This single statement from JFK’s inaugural speech meant more than just words.

I also believe that ethos and pathos were major factors as well. It is my understanding that the Kennedy name itself exemplified a strong and trustworthy personal character. I have heard JFK was a people’s President and from this pathos is applied. His inaugural speech stimulated the emotion in the crowd. Aristotle’s classification scheme did work for JFK.
The personal quality that I have that makes me persuasive regarding Aristotle’s classification scheme is pathos. I have the ability to get the audience emotionally intrigued. Although I have been told that some of the sayings that I use stay with my audience and are reiterated in their own persuasive interactions, which in turn would be the usage of logos.

Introduction

Hi Everyone - I look forward to reading everyone's responses to our discussion questions this semester. I have taken other online classes and in one we used a blog. It was really effective for my learning style. It is also interesting to see how everyone interpretes things differently.

I have 12 units left after this semester before I complete a bachelors in communication. My utlimate goal is to go to grad school and complete a masters in communication.

A little about myself. I am married and have a 12 year old son. We are avid Shark fans. Goooo Sharks. I have recently become addicted to a show on HBO True Blood. It is a seven book series and I am on the third book.