Week 3_P2

The Greeks believed that to be an orator, an individual had to be morally good. I agree with this statement. The reason for that is a person will not be able to influence anyone if you do not have integrity. An example of this is during the recent Presidential campaign. A Republican who works with me said, “How could he vote for John McCain with a running mate like Sarah Palin?” I asked what he meant by that statement. He went on to say, “If something happened to John McCain, then, Sarah Palin would be next in command.” He further mentioned, “How could someone who just came out of nowhere have the experience and integrity of what the American people need right now?” Since he perceived Sarah Palin as a candidate who did not have the moral good he was looking for in a Republican team, I wonder if he voted Republican.”

What, if any, is the connection between goodness, truth, and public communication? Cicero believed, “One of the three styles of speaking was ‘the plain style’ which built ethos by convincing the audience of the speaker’s good character, good sense, and trustworthiness; it was logical, clear, and restrained” [Trenholm 2008, pg. 7]. I believe the connection between goodness, truth, and public communication is that all are interrelated. Without one part of the tri-pod, you will not receive the powerful outcome from your speech. By this I mean if you do not have integrity, then your audience will not respect/trust whatever you have to say. For example, I have no respect for ex-President Nixon who was impeached due to his involvement with the Watergate scandal. If I see clips of him speaking I wonder what part of it was true…I simply flip the channel.