Read, research and write about the ethics in public lies for the benefit of the people. Being in an election-year cycle there's much to choose from, such as the recent Supreme Court ruling on the constitutionality of the Affordable Healthcare Act. With the Court's ruling there's much rhetoric involved on both sides of the isle, most of which may be questionable.
Description
Find an artifact, a speech, a press conference, a talk-show appearance, something both verbal and non-verbal. Break it down in terms of the issue's content and analyze how the rhetoric was spun to put that issue out to the people.
Then analyze the delivery of the rhetoric. Identify oculesic, paraliniguistic, kinesic, or proxemic tells that may make one suspect the "truthiness" of the content.
Finally, answer how was the truth manipulated.
This is due, Wednesday, July 18th. All claims, including the source of the artifact will be cited APA or MLA style, your preference,along with embedded hotlinks to your web sources. Submit your work as a PDF to comm3150@gmail.com.
Point Total: 300
Rubric
You identify a valid artifact intended for public consumption. Preferred is a YouTube post where one can review the artifact. 50 points.
You analyze the rhetoric of the artifact, what's true about the issue versus what the rhetor would have the audience believe. This will require research and/or background knowledge on your part of the issue. Be sure to be well-versed on the subject. 100 points.
You determine nonverbal and verbal tells of the rhetor, citing points in their delivery where they've tipped their hand. This could be in eye-movement and blink rates, in semantic aphasia, in delayed emblems, illustrators or regulators, or perhaps in the body language of the subject. 100 points.
You postulate how the truth was manipulated. 50 Points.
No comments:
Post a Comment