Aristotle On Rhetoric
So, here I am in my second and last term of PR at Centennial College, wondering where do I fit in. I’ve had so much information thrown at me in the past few months, I don’t know what has stuck and what has just slid off. I’m making contacts in the most unlikely places, reading the newspaper from cover to cover, listening to the news and now blogging (which, if you knew me, you’d understand what a Kafka-esque metamorphosis this truly is), when I came across this podcast via Facebook called Inside PR. Included is a blog by a fascinating man called Michael Netzley from Singapore (CommunicateAsia). He has started a series of blogs “describing the intellectual roots of our profession.”
PR people everywhere will immediately think he’s talking about Edward Bernays, Arthur Page and Ivy Leadbetter Lee. But he goes farther back than that to ancient Athens and the world’s first and greatest orators. And I think, “Of course, why didn’t I make the connection before? I minored in Classics, for crying out loud!” (Actually, I focused on the poets – so give me some credit!) Suddenly, my ears perk up.
Netzley talks about Aristotle’s On Rhetoric, which describes in painfully delicious detail the art of persuasion. Aristotle breaks it down into three components (which are then further broken down, but for simplicity’s sake, I’ll only talk about these three): ethos, pathos and logos.
Ethos is the starting point — in essence, the speaker, or rather, their character or credibility as an orator or communicator.
[Interesting etymology fact No. 1: Ethic is derived from this Greek word.]
Pathos is appealing to the audience. It is the art of tapping into the emotions of the audience to alter their judgement. It is a quality that evokes sympathy and a sense of sorrow or pity, so that the audience sides with the speaker. Literally, it means suffering, disease, feeling.
[Interesting etymology fact No. 2: Think of every word you can that begins or ends with "path."]
Logos is the message — something said that requires intelligence and reasoning.
[Interesting etymology fact No. 3: Logic is derived from this word.]
Let’s bring this back to PR: Ethos = Communicator ~ Pathos = Target Audience ~ Logos = Key Messages. It rolls off the tongue like a mantra. Say it with me, on three: uno, dos, tres ~ Ethos, Pathos, Logos. Brilliant!
Netzley says, “This model teaches us to think about the communicator’s desired outcome, the message’s argumentative logic, and the audience’s predispositions and what they might respond favorably to.”
So, now I’m jazzed. Not only am I a part of an exciting and growing profession, but one that is over 2400 years old. It’s all starting to come into focus. Now, I know where I fit in. Now, I know I belong.
Next week on Inside PR, Netzley will talk about Cicero. As for me, the sky’s the limit.
Loading...
I love how the role of the communicator is broken down into three components. It’s like a light bulb in my head went off – EUREKA! As a budding PR professional, it is always good to see that our profession isn’t one of chance, but it is deeply rooted. In fact over 2400 years old!
journalist77 - January 20, 2008 at 8:23 pm
…and welcome to blogging!
Arianna Huffington has built her blog into a phenomenon – over 1 million visitors each day! And to think she was my regular lunch guest in London all those years ago.
Loved your blog – well done!
Lance Secretan - January 20, 2008 at 10:34 pm
Gosh, you’re smart, Natalie : ) And, I love the term “Kafka-esque” so much!
This note will have no productive value whatsoever, but I like your layout. It definitely fits with your nerdly nerdtron “super” blog title!
Rayanne Langdon - January 22, 2008 at 1:41 am
Hi Natalie. Thank you for visiting my blog and your kind words. I loved hearing that you found the enthusiasm to start your own blog and that you already have three posts. Keep pressing forward, and I shall do the same with more of the history. I just submitted another segment to Terry and Dave, so hopefully you will hear more soon.
Let me know if I can ever be of assistance.
Michael Netzley - January 27, 2008 at 6:39 am
[...] also picked up on my recent series Communication Legacies and created her own blog. You can find the first post here (way to go Natalie!). For some of the students, the step is a bit smaller because they are [...]
CommunicateAsia » Blog Archive » 76. Refreshing to See SMU Students Experiment with Social Media - January 27, 2008 at 6:46 am
When I read this blog, I couldn’t help thinking about the communication theories put forth by Harold Innis. The Bias of Communication is an historical overview on the forms of communication that helped precipitate the rise and fall of civilizations, and is a critique of media up to the first half of the twenty century.
The main point contained within Innis’ theory is that the bias of communication has an effect both temporally and spatially dependant on the type of media (the oral tradition or the written tradition respectively) and, as a result communication bias is connected to the media of choice during each particular historical epoch and by each civilization. Ancient civilizations were socially and culturally more stable over time because of their use of the oral tradition, as opposed to the present Western civilization where the written tradition is prone to the bias of communication through fragmentation and assumptions. To be continued when I finally write my first real blog.
karinmk123 - February 1, 2008 at 1:21 am
Natasha ~ glad you liked the literary journey there. I scared some people off with too many big words. But really, they’re only four- and five-letter words. I bracketed those parts so that people could skip over them. Love your wordchoice: EUREKA! = an exclamation uttered by Archimedes when he discovered how to measure the purity of gold. There I go again! I can’t help it! The blog don’t lie: I’m a word nerd.
Karin ~ Yes, it’s sad but true. Behind most historical campaign, be it war, politics or religion, there was a PR person pumping out propaganda to the innocent minions. But they took their time and they composed beautiful pieces of art!!! Thankfully, we’re a smarter world these days and we don’t buy into such hogwash so willingly. Be it a caveat to us and all our budding colleagues, as we enter into the world of PR.
Check out my post Media Relations Eddie-style. Notice the object in the background. It is the legs, or rather, stumps that were left behind after liberated Iraqis tore down Hussein’s statue. Eddie calls it art. Interesting. Could this be a poke at PR and its involvement in such a takedown?
PR has its heroes and its villains like any other profession.
And one of those heroes is Michael Netzley, who continues to support students like myself. Thanks for “listening.” I’ve coined Michael as the Professor of Social Media University [SMU] — he actually teaches out of Singapore Management University [SMU]. Holla!
And Dad ~ when are you going to take me out for lunch?
Rayanne ~ you’re my inspiration when it comes to blogging. You have my eyeballs.
nsecretan - February 9, 2008 at 2:01 am