Oratory Skills and Appearance in a Technological Society
In 1981, America voted its first actor and politician president, Ronald Regan. Not only did he look good on camera, but he was also a great speaker and funny. Ronald Regan seems more qualified to manage a sports team in the NFL or Media Corporation. I would assume that for Boomers, watching Ronald Regan become president is like watching a millennial watching Leonardo DiCaprio become president today. The question that comes to mind is whether it was an act. With no factual political background, education, or history, he was elected Governor of California and eventually President of the United States. This is significant because it marks the shift where media and entertainment have taken over politics. It highlights how entertainment grasped American culture and public dialogue. Niel Postman once said, “Americans no longer talk to each other; they entertain each other. They do not exchange ideas; they exchange images. They do not argue with propositions; they argue with good looks, celebrities, and commercials" (Postman, 1985, p. 93). In today’s ever-evolving technological landscape, politicians, influencers, activists, journalists, and businesses use a combination of oratory skills and physical appearance, frequently overshadowing substantive political issues and diminishing the importance of genuine leadership qualities and actual talents, dramatically impacting public perception and discourse. As entertainment prioritizes superficiality, focusing on looks and how well someone speaks, the public becomes more susceptible to being swayed by charismatic presentations over sound policies and logic, ultimately shaping societal values and the democratic process.
American culture and public discourse are profoundly reflected in entertainment, and this connection serves as a crucial lens through which we can understand the media's influence on societal values and perceptions. Postman (1986) observes, "Our politics, religion, news, athletics, education, and commerce have been transformed into congenial adjuncts of show business, largely without protest or popular notice. The result is that we are a people on the verge of amusing ourselves to death.". Despite all the critical issues, browsing social media or surfing the internet for real news seems to give more attention to trivial matters like celebrity issues and pop-targeted ads. It is frustrating seeing attention given to celebrities and commercialism rather than attention to current issues such as climate change, the economy, or war. High-profile celebrity scandals and court cases like the OJ Simpson case and the Mendez brothers, Johnny Depp, and Puff Daddy played on Netflix overshadow ongoing war, economic climate change, and civil rights issues. Today's internet is surrounded by ads, clickbait headlines, and influencers promoting business, overshadowing the ongoing problems. Entertainment has taken over businesses. For example, the popular TV show The Apprentice was a top-rated show that lasted 15 seasons before Trump became president. It took something as serious as running a business and made it entertaining. Education has also been impacted by its amusing appeal. Studying has transformed into entertainment, such as watching IT training programs like IP Pro TV or YouTube videos that provide tutorials, even YouTube videos on topics such as math and philosophy. However, one may argue these videos are excellent ways to learn and I agree. Some videos are entertaining, especially IT Pro TV, and help someone understand a lot in a short amount of time. Will-crafted educational videos can be valuable. For example, I used to watch Bill Nye the Science Guy and still remember a lot of the stuff he taught me. Even in today’s job market, job searching is a boat, and Pony shows an infographic resume with your picture added to sway the employer to provide you with an interview with your looks. Some people spend hours crafting the perfect LinkedIn profile to ensure everything you put on their image looks good and boosts your professional image to land a job.
There is an obsession with good looks and vanity today. The emphasis on physical appearance can be problematic, shifting the public's attention away from the candidates' policies and capabilities. “Although the Constitution does not address the issue, it seems that overweight individuals and those who are bald are effectively excluded from running for high political office. This exclusion also applies to anyone whose appearance is not significantly enhanced by cosmetic products. We may have reached a point where cosmetic appeal has become more important than ideological beliefs for politicians. Journalists, particularly television newscasters, have recognized this trend” (Postman, 1986). In today's society, it is important to have a good appearance. During my early military career, I realized the importance of looking good. I questioned why appearance mattered if I was doing the job excellently. Throughout my entire career, I worked my butt off to show I was a good worker, but there were times when my uniform would be trashed from work, and I did not have time to get haircuts from a barber, so I would cut it myself to regulation. When I focused on my appearance, like getting a haircut from a professional versus self-cut hair or wearing a new clean uniform versus an old uniform that was faded from washing or shining boots, as well as staying in shape, my work ethic declined, but I received better marks on evaluations. I would argue that’s how I made rank despite having less work performance.
Rhetoric combined with good looks can effectively persuade and influence the audience, making it a valuable tool for presenting and supporting arguments in politics or convincing someone to buy your product. Incorporating rhetoric in everyday life allows for analyzing different communication strategies and their effectiveness, demonstrating a deep understanding of persuasive techniques and their applications. Incorporating rhetoric in education, such as a paper, allows for analyzing different communication strategies and their effectiveness, demonstrating a deep understanding of persuasive techniques and their applications; the famous philosopher Aristotle once defined rhetoric as "the faculty of discovering the possible means of persuasion about any subject whatever." This implies that rhetoric is not confined to a specific topic and can be used to persuade on various issues. Like the incoming president, Trump, rhetoric can be used as a persuasive tool to negotiate a better deal, convince someone to buy my product, support my cause, or nail a job interview. Or, like Nike's "Just Do it" advertisements, Iraq-Afghan wartime speeches, or getting a speech from the commanding officer. Political speeches that sway public opinion, such as those about Malcolm X or Steve Jobs's Apple product launch presentation. Critics claim that rhetoric is manipulative and can be used for malicious purposes, leading to experiences of unethical behavior and undermining truth. The orator persuades by moral character when his speech is delivered in such a manner as to render him worthy of confidence." "The orator persuades using his hearers when they are roused to emotion by his speech." "Lastly, persuasion is produced by the speech itself, when we establish the truth or truth from the means of persuasion applicable to each subject." (Freese)/Book 1, 2010). Essentially, Rhetoric is a valuable tool we should all learn. However, rhetoric can be abused by manipulating emotions, spreading misinformation, and using persuasive techniques to deceive or mislead audiences rather than engaging in honest discourse.
The media is overwhelmed with rhetoric and focus on appearance and superficiality is prioritized over substance. This trivializes serious issues and reduces critical matters to mere entertainment. Politics, climate change, gun violence, and even war are used as tools for politicians who look good and speak nicely to convince people to vote for them or influencers to view their content. With today's technology, politicians, influencers, activists, and journalists use a combination of oratory skills and physical appearance more than ever before, frequently overshadowing substantive political issues and diminishing the importance of genuine leadership qualities and actual talents, dramatically impacting public perception and discourse. As entertainment prioritizes superficiality, focusing on looks and how well someone speaks, the public becomes more susceptible to being swayed by charismatic presentations over sound policies and logic, ultimately shaping societal values and the democratic process. Many people may argue that trivial issues distract from everyday life problems and reduce stress, and conversations started by celebrity scandals lead to increased awareness of current societal problems. Instead of evaluating leaders based on their ideas and qualifications, voters may be swayed by superficial qualities.
Today's politics are oversaturated with rhetoric and appearance. It is like watching the movie "The Campaign" starring Will Ferrell and Zach Galifianakis. Will Ferrell plays an arrogant Democrat who frequently comments on his hair and appearance. Will Ferrell's character is like Governor Newsom or Ronald Reagon and displays how appearance can significantly impact politics. His charisma and attractiveness often eclipse his actual policies. Nevertheless, people will constantly obsess with appearance. In 2014, Barack Obama wore a tan suit while president, which created skepticism in the media, which highlights the media’s focus on appearance versus his actual policies and actions—the use of entertainers in political rallies and celebrity endorsement. One party campaign had artists such as Megan the Stallion and Gorilla performances to sway voters. The political party also used Beyonce and Taylor Swift to sway voters to vote for their party. Most celebrities do not have the same financial problems as Americans, so how can they relate? Politicians increasingly seek celebrity endorsements, leveraging their image to boost their appeal. Some may argue that integrating show business into everyday life helps keep people's attention and makes it more engaging. Entertainment is taking over public discourse in a broader critique of how various fields have embraced show business elements. "Our politics, religion, news, athletics, education, and commerce have been transformed into congenial adjuncts of show business, largely without protest or even much widespread notice. The result is that we are a people on the verge of amusing ourselves to death. This statement seems so true. We live in a world that is nothing but entertainment.
In conclusion, in today's tech landscape, politicians, influencers, activists, journalists, and even businesses use a combination of oratory skills and physical appearance, frequently overshadowing substantive political issues and diminishing the importance of genuine leadership qualities and actual talents, dramatically impacting public perception and discourse. As entertainment prioritizes superficiality, focusing on looks and how well someone speaks, the public becomes more susceptible to being swayed by charismatic presentations over sound policies and logic, ultimately shaping societal values and the democratic process. Society needs to be aware of superficially voting for someone based on their looks and speech and look at actual policy and capability of running anything. Today’s political battle is between rich businesspeople and rich actors. Rhetoric used by both today is abused more than ever, causing a mess of logical fallacies with ad hominem attacks on one another. They are politically clinging to emotional appeals using fearmongering tactics. These types of abuse are prevalent in politics, media, advertising, and even everyday interactions using rhetoric and appearance. Recognizing these techniques can help guard against manipulation and promote more thoughtful, evidence-based discourse. Ultimately, Rhetoric combined with appearance can be a powerful tool to convince others, and if you have both, it should be used throughout your daily life for success, but it has the potential for abuse.
References
Postman, N. (1986). Amusing ourselves to death: Public discourse in the age of show business. Penguin Books.
Rhetoric (Freese)/Book 1. (2010, March 30). In Wikisource. Retrieved 14:06, October 22, 2024, from https://en.wikisource.org/w/index.php?title=Rhetoric_(Freese)/Book_1&oldid=1833179