The Confidence of a Great Leader

There have been many great leaders of America that have used all of the powers of ethos to make the American people love them. President Franklin Delano Roosevelt was one of these great leaders. One example of when President roosevelt used his ethos to present an issue was on December 8, 1941. President Roosevelt was addressing many important members of the government and the American people about the Pearl Harbor attack that had happened just the day before.

President Roosevelt already had almost 'built-in' ethos just from being the President. As so, he held the highest position of authority in the country. He was able to influence many people because they respected and honored his words.

Roosevelt cuts right to the chase and begins addressing how there had been "no threat or hint of war or of armed attack." (par.4) Many people were shocked at how the Japanese had been able to sneak behind the back of the U.S. President Roosevelt begins to speak as if he is just a regular citizen who is just as shocked as everyone else. He appeals to people and their emotions because it indeed was a tragic day. He shows sincere emotion and speaks with profound clairy when he says, " I regret to tell you that many American lives have been lost." (par.6) He is very truthful with the audience and this gives him even more credibility then he already has. This is also a very smart way to involve pathos, by appealing to the citizens emotions of shock and fear.

The President then uses an interesting tactic. He uses repition to address the places where Japan had attacked the United States. (par.6) By doing this, he over emphasizes how real and detrimental the situation is. It arouses a sense of fear in the audience when they begin to realize all of the damage that the Japaneses empire has caused in such short time.

However, right after the bold statements, the President uses ethos to reassure his nation, as noted by Madeline in her analysis in the fourth paragraph. He begins by stating, "As commander in chief of the Army and Navy, I have directed that all measures be take for our defense." (par.8) Not only is he the President of the country, but he restates his position as commander of the armed forces. He speaks with courage and confidence when he says, "the American people in their righteous might will win through absolute victory." (par.9) He shows that he has determination to protect the American people. He uses his authority to publicly display his determination in a time of severe crisis. He continutes with his wave of confidence by stating, "with confidence in our armed forces, with the unbounding determination of our people, we will gain inevitable triumph."(par.12) He shows the people and the members of Congress and Senate that he plans on protecting and defending the country's rights by any means.

President Roosevelt uses ethos in the form of confidence and courage to his great advantage in his speech. He also relates to the american people by saying 'we' instead of 'I'. Some of the ethos used is to boost the confidence of the United States, and is strictly for the people. His sheer conviction regarding the issue and the confidence he shows makes the people want to support him and give their support to whatever he may ask of them. President Roosevelt gains the trust and support of the American people by the way he presents the issue with such authority and formality.

Beauty for All

It is highly unlikely that one has watched television or read a magazine without seeing a Proactiv Solution advertisement. Their commercials have become so popular due to their promised guarantee, that they are virtually everywhere.

I did not really notice that ProActiv focuses primarily on Caucasians until I read Ben's analysis. Most, if not all of the women and men on their website, commercials and magazine articles are Caucasias. It is true that 'the average white does have a higher income than African-Americans or Hispanics.' (par.3) This is so proved in an article called "Race and Income", which states that, "White incomes have risen a bit, on average, while incomes for black and Hispanic families have declined." (par.2) So, by appealing to the more wealthy, they hope to draw in more money. It is unclear as to if the company is trying to say that white people are more beautiful than the other races or not. Some people may take offense to the fact that there are primarily whites on the advertisements and commercials. In looking up other articles I came across one that noted P. Diddy and the Williams sisters. That is the first time I have seen African Americans mentioned in a ProActiv advertisement. It is true that even though they hardly do it, when they do, they mention famous athletes and musical artists to draw in the crowd.

It is true that the site is primarily focused on women in their late teens and older. They have gotten gorgeous actresses, dancers and other Hollywood starts to promote their products. The Proactiv company has ingeniously used these not only attractive, but rich and famous, people to promote their products. Many women become tricked by this and think that if they use Proactiv, they too will become beautiful like the beautiful women who endorse it. These stars also always look precisely immaculate in the commercials, leading consumers to believe they will be happy and immaculate too with the use of these products. As silly as it sounds, it works. Most women are so concerned about their looks that they will do anything to become more beautiful than the next girl. These women will also usually go to any cost, however extreme, to make beauty happen for them. Proactiv can charge whatever they want because they target the female audience so well with their endorsers. It is an ingenious tactic and other companies should learn from their example.


Proactiv located their two main target consumers and used tactics to persuade and draw them in to purchasing their products. The company was obviously very smart in determining the audience they would show their products to. Being aware of the audience can help to make writing or advertisements more successful.

Ignorance of Authority

In 1949, in the state of Illinois, there was a bill proposed called "An Act to Provide Protection to Insectivorous Birds by Restraining Cats", or for short, the "Cat Bill". The article I read was the veto statement made by the governor, Adlai Stevenson. There are many fallacies he uses when he addresses his stand he took regarding the bill. However, there are three that are the most noticeable.

Stevenson begins by stating all of the reasons why he denied the bill. Right off the bat, he starts to become very ignorant. He is allotted to have his own opinions, especially because of the position that he holds. However, he takes his side and pushes it on the reader as if there is no way anyone could feel differently than he does. He does give reasons for why he thought the proposal was not significant, but the way he writes makes it appear that he is saying, 'this law is completely ridiculous and should not have been considered at all'. This can be shown by his statement, "Whatever the reasons for passage at this session, I cannot believe there is a widespread public demand for this law or that it could, as a practical matter, be enforced." (par.3) His complete disbelief and ignorance is quite insulting, as there are obviously people who take the issue seriously. He uses his authority and an 'appeal to ignorance' to try to persuade the reader his opinion is right.

Another fallacy that is found is 'stacking the deck'. Stevenson only presents his side of the argument. He thinks that no one would doubt his statements, no matter how irrational, due to his authoritative position. However, in reality, reading his reasons created negative ethos for himself. As a leader and a governor, one expects him to be rational and to equally present both sides of the argument, regardless of his stand on it. He leaves out anything about why the supporters of the proposal felt the way they did. He ignores their opinions and arguments because they do not support his own.

The last fallacy is that of the 'slippery slope'. In the veto he says, "If we attempt to resolve it by legislation who knows but what we may be called upon to take sides as well in the age old problems of dog versus cat, bird versus bird, or even bird versus worm. If we attempt to resolve it by legislation who knows but what we may be called upon to take sides as well in the age old problems of dog versus cat, bird versus bird, or even bird versus worm. " (par.5) He tries to make the reader feel that the proposed bill is incompetent because it will just cause more problems.

Stevenson tries to use logical fallacies to persuade the reader that his points are the most valid. However, they work against him and make him look rude and completely biased.

Divorce and Negativity

Karl Zinsmeister's article "Divorce's Toll on Children" begins with a very strong statistic, "Since 1972, more than a million youngsters have been involved in a divorce each year." (par.1) He automatically starts off by assuming that the readers of his article are more educated than the 'youngsters' he refers to.

Like Madeline stated in her analysis of this article, the author does use quite a bit of overstatement to get his point across. He tries to convince the reader of the idea that children are emotionally affected when their parents are divorced. It is "more common" for children to be more greatly hurt by a divorce than other stressful events. He also talks about how divoced family interaction is "particularly likely" to happen. Using words and phrases such as these alarm the reader and continue to convince them that divorce is truly a negative experience for all of those involved.

In the next part of the article, Zinsmeister uses a somewhat serious and very earnest tone to get his points across. He ways, "children's view of divorce...is a disaster." (par.9) He talks about how to many children, the only thing more difficult to deal with is the death of a loved one. To many kids, divorce could be related to the death of a family, seeing that after divorce it is generally hard to keep strong family ties. Children want to grow up in a 'normal' family home, with both a mother and father. by addressing these things, the author is using his more serious tone to express the severity of teh issue. By using quotations from credible sources, he is able to address the topic with much more authority and believability.

Madeline also stated in her analysis that the author was completely one-sided regarding the issue of divorce. The author only wants to talk about the horrendous and terrible things that divorce can do to a family. While his credible facts completely back up his argument, it is important to be open minded to the other side as well.

The anger he shows towards the issue makes one believe he has had some sort of close encounter with divorce, or divorce related situations. The passion he puts into addressing the effects it has on children make the reader aware of what exactly it can do. Girls are more likely to develop habits like "substance abuse, running away and early sexual activity." (par.30) On the other hand, boys are more likely to become "depressed and angry." (par.30) This makes the reader become emotionally afraid for all children in divorced familites.

The author projects all of his emotions and attitudes through the way and order he expresses his ideas. He makes himself clear through ethos, logos and pathos. He expresses emotion through statements regarding family. He also uses imagery to present the issue in a negative way. It is very effective because he makes the reader want to become more informed about the issue, and also helps him to use his serious tone effectively. He gives reasons and statistics showing that divorce truly does harm families, and makes himself and his words more legitimate by using very well known sources. Karl Zinsmeister succeeded in creating a negative image of divorce by using language tools throughout the entire article.

Why Smoke?

There are many activities that people participate in that are damaging to themselves and those around them. I read the article, “The Negative Effects of Smoking on Bones, Joints, and Healing” by Paul Paryski, MA. He divides the article into three sections: Introduction, Results, and Conclusion. He uses these three categories to organize his facts about the negative effects of smoking on the human body.

He starts off by stating that, “There are roughly 50 million smokers in the United States in spite of a great deal of publicity about the negative effects of smoking on health.” (par.1) By beginning such an article with such a statement, he draws the reader to already reconsider the logic of choosing to smoke. He continues to address how cigarette smoking is becoming rapidly more popular in other countries as well as the United States. He states that they “can least afford either the cost of cigarettes or the cost of their negative effect on health.” (par.1) This is saying that many countries prefer to take part in cigarette smoking, not noting how it effects their health. Also, most struggling countries have so many other health issues to take care of that the effects of smoking might get pushed aside.

The next few paragraphs in the Introduction section talk about the effects that smoking has on health that are hardly ever addressed to the public or by doctors. He says, “The effects of smoking on the musculoskeletal system (bones, joints, muscles) have not been the subject of much publicity, and it has not been given the same attention as other smoking related diseases.” (I.e. cancer) (par.3) The article continues with facts about studies showing that smoking can be directly related to healing. By using information from scientists and other doctors, he makes his claim full of clarity. It makes his supportive evidence more effective.
The author starts off the Results part of the article by stating a statistic. He says, “Of 82 studies, 44 strongly suggest that smoking had a very serious negative impact on the musculoskeletal system.” (par.7) He then lists a few of the 500 different poisonous gases that are released into the lungs during early smoking. Most of them listed are common, yet harmful gases. He continues to talk about the analysis of a study regarding the effect of those harmful chemical and gases. All of the things listed are all horrifyingly painful and would be terrible to live with.

He then concludes by simply stating, “It should be remembered that annually over 500,000 deaths in the United States and millions throughout the world, are caused by smoking.” (par.11)

Not only does this article give reason for why smoking is incredibly harmful, but it gives facts and statistics to support the argument. The author also cites a credible and authoritative source (a book written by and orthopedic surgeon) to back up his facts. If people would read this article, their logic and thoughts towards smoking would be changed. If the reader was not a smoker, they would just be assured more that smoking is something that is extremely harmful to everyone. If the reader was a smoker, the facts and ideas stated in the article would influence him to rethink his reasons for why he smokes and thus causing his logic to change. Not only does the author prove once again that smoking is harmful, but that it has hidden damages that it causes. Many people think that the only thing that smoking does is cause cancer and shorten lives, however, there are many things that occur in the human body that many are not aware of. The author opens their eyes to the many other life threatening problems smoking can cause. Smoking not only can damage and eventually kill you, but can also hurt those around you.

Paryski, Paul. "The Negative Effects of Smoking on bones, Joints and Healing." Health and Age.com. N.p, 18 June 2009.Web. 25 September 2009.

The musculoskeletal effects of smoking. SE. Porter, EN. Hanley Jr, J Am Acad Orthop Surg, 2001, vol.9, pp.9--17.

The Power of A Ban

One article can be emotionally appealing to many different types of people. I read the article the “Anatomy of a Ban”, written by Alina Hoffman and Ann Friedman. This article compares two proposed abortion bans and compares the language that is presented in both of them. The law in South Dakota was not nearly as strongly worded as the one (H.B.1) proposed in Georgia. By reading the texts compared, it makes it clear that the anti-abortionists in Georgia are much more emotionally attached to the issue.
Pathos is more about getting the reader to experience a single emotion. The legislation that will be proposed by Georgia not only makes a much bolder statement, it is a much more effectively worded document. In the article, the Georgia proposal quotes the Roe v. Wade document, making their argument very credible and believable. It quotes, “man’s knowledge is not in a position to speculate as to the answer [to the question of when life begins] (par.5).” The emotion portrayed in this statement shows that the writers of the document do think that knowledge is present, but that it cannot be the determining factor in all decisions.
The article then moves on to talk about if women should be prosecuted for having abortions. South Dakota talked about how they should not be bothered for their personal decisions. However; Georgia went into detail about how women “should be convicted of felony and punished” for the killing of a human fetus (par.9). They present their argument in such a forceful way that makes me believe that this issue is very important to them. Reading the article makes me question if this issue is as important to me as it is to them. Feelings are aroused through the strength of their words, and the position that they are taking on this ongoing issue.
Many reasons are given as to why the anti-abortionists feel that abortion should be banned. Not only do they give reasons as to why it should be illegal, but also ways that legalized abortion has damaged communities and homes in our country. They state facts that make the reader know that what they say is credible, and they also arouse an emotion of fear as they present the harmful damages that abortions can cause families.
The writers of H.B.1 also reach out to another crowd when they reference to Susan B. Anthony. As one of the greatest women in American history, her words about any issue are going to be greatly respected, regardless of the subject. She called abortion “child murder (par.12).” Due to the face that she cared so much about the rights and safety of other people, her statements are very credible. The bill also states that “legalized abortion has had a profound detrimental effect on the health and well-being of citizens of this state as well as the health of the community (par.12).” This poses a threat against citizens of the country and can invoke fear in the hearts of the readers and get them to start to side with their thoughts. The writers of the bill use pathos to get readers to become emotionally attached to the issue. Those reading it start to see the emotion put into the argument and from the fury of the arguers, they begin to feel some of the same fury towards the issue of legalization of abortion.
H.B.1 lays out the ideas of the anti-abortionists very strongly and quite explicitly. However; it is not inappropriate in any way. It is very radical, and many people do not expect it to pass due to its’ extreme nature. The article is bursting with passion and anger as the wishes of the groups are vividly expressed. They start to make one wonder about their moral beliefs by presenting a credible and valid argument with strong and powerful emotion.



Hoffman, Alina and Friedman, Ann. "Anatomy of a Ban." The American Prospect, 22 January 2007. Web. 23 Sep. 2009.

Influence of Time

Words can have such great power and influence in the lives of humans. There have been many speeches given by authoritative figures in American history that could have been directly related to kairos. Kairos means the right time, at the right place, with the right people. I read Martin Luther King Jr.'s 'I Have a Dream' speech. Back in the early 1950's and 1960's, segregation was nothing but common amongst American citizens. People were accustomed to those of other ethnicities being below them and not allowing them to have the same rights as those 'true Americans'. Martin Luther King became aware of these issues at a very early age. He grew up in a very religious family and became a pastor at just the age of 25. Martin Luther gathered facts and began to find people that supported him, both of the African American race, and that of others as well.


Segregation and unequal treatment had been going on for years before Martin Luther King Jr. became involved in the issues. African Americans had been treated unfairly by other citizens as well as government authorities (i.e. police officers). There had been many cases of children being harassed for drinking out of a 'whites only' drinking fountain. Rosa Parks had gotten arrested for not moving from her seat for a white citizen. People were aware of the issue, whether they wanted to be or not. When Martin delivered his speech on August 28, 1963, people were ready to hear what he said. People were ready to have a leader step up and take charge to change the views of those who weren't being fair. Martin Luther King delivered his speech with impeccable timing, and those who were there recieved it with all of the power that he delievered it with. He said, "One hundred years later, the Negro is still languished in the corners of American society and finds himself an exile in his own land. And so we've come here today to dramatize a shameful condition." (par.3) He addressed the true fact that African American's progress towards equality had hardly moved over hundreds of years. Everyone knew that it was time to make a change, and by giving it when he did, he woke up many Americans as to the horrific treatment that was occuring in this country.

Martin Luther King Jr. chose a prime place to deliver his memorable speech. Delivering it in Washington D.C. showed numerous things about him, and also affected his speech. By giving it in such a monumental place in the country, many people were exposed to what he was saying. It showed that he had courage and that he was willing to fully back up the issue at hand. He chose a place that was a neutral zone. It would have been much less effective if he were to have given it in Alabama, because of the heavier concentration of African Americans. Washington D.C. at that time had an ample amount of many different races, thus making it much more effective. By having his speech in D.C, he made many people think that he had faith in the issue. Having it in such an important location showed that he had confidence in the issue of segregation being solved. Many people became inspired to help push for the passing of the Equal Rights Amendment because of his speech.


Going along with that, hundreds of thousands of Americans attended the speech. Not only were the vast majority of them supporters, but there were many protestors there as well. The protestors were there to try to boycott the speech, but regardless, they were there to hear what he had to say. Supporters came from all across the country to hear this monumental speech, and it was broadcasted on many television and radio stations. Many people, even not in attendance, were affected by the power with which he delivered the speech. Many people became actively involved in the issues after his speech because of how he aroused emotions in American citizens. Martin Luther related to the people by talking about his dreams and his wishes to make America the best country it can be. He persuades the citizens because they are able to feel the sincerity of his words.

Martin Luther King Jr.'s speech was directly related to kairos. The timing of his speech during these difficult times helped to make it more effective. He delivered it to many different races of Americans, making it a monumental speech. He got many people aware of, and involved in the issues at hand. Delivering it Washington D.C. gave the speech the edge that it needed. It showed that he was a true leader and that he genuinely cared about treatment of all citizens. His courageousness proved him to be one of the most influential leaders that would ever live. Due to his speech and the dedication to the issue at hand, segregation became illegal and African Americans were given fair treatment.


American Rhetoric Top 100 American Speeches. 2001-2009. American Rhetoric. 18 September
2009 <http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/mlkihaveadream.htm>.