Communication-Persuasion Paradigm - Research Paper Example

? PERSUASION Communication-Persuasion – Paradigm COMMUNICATION-PERSUASION PARADIGM Throughout history there have been relatively few leaderswho effectively persuaded millions of followers to pursue momentous history altering courses of action. This paper examines 3 figures, Hitler, Churchill and Jesus to assess what lead to their success. COMMUNICATION-PERSUASION PARADIGN Introduction As human beings we communicate with each other in both written and spoken form with many purposes in mind, that is, to educate, to inform, to entertain and finally to persuade. We are bombarded daily with advertising messages to buy this or that product, or to support or reject a particular political and/o religious view. Usually these messages have little impact on us, except perhaps subliminally, as we tune them out in our minds if not literally. However there are occasions in history when messages, especially political and/or religious have resonated with thousands even millions of people. To effectively persuade so many amenable aspects of the 3 elements of communication, that is, source, message and target. This is not to say that all 3 elements must be “perfect” in every way to achieve impact. However they must each have sufficient strengths that taken together they will impact the target population in the way desired by the source. This source or messenger must be able to articulate an issue and provide a vision for resolving it which resonates with the target audience. ( Simon p.6)Basically there are 2 kinds of persuasive communications, rhetorical and relational. The COMMUNICATION-PERSUASION PARADIGM object of rhetorical communication is to persuade the recipients that they can improve their situation by acting in ways urged by the source. On the other hand, the goal of a relational communication is for the recipient to establish a relation with the messenger, irrespective of whether the recipient changes his or her actions in any way. I would argue that the categories are not mutually exclusive and may be embodied in the same message, likely with one aspect stressed more than the other. I intend to exemplify these points in a discussion of 3 historical figures Adolf Hitler A short man, Hitler was not an imposing figure. In spite of this he was able to persuade millions of Germans to act on his vision of the Third Reich. This was because of his great oratory skills and his message of Aryan superiority which resonated with audiences suffering under the Great ( Worldwide) Depression exacerbated by the harsh reparation terms of the Versailles Treaty imposed by the Allies after World War II (youtube) Although he railed against this treaty, the harm allegedly done by international finance especially credit, the impotence of the League of Nations and the weak government he succeeded, theses rants in my view were not as effective as the scapegoating of segments of society, especially Jews (1937 Anniversary Speech). Even people who did not understand more abstract complicated issues could see the tangible difference between the wealth of most Jews compared to their own. COMMUNICATION-PERSUASION PARADIGM He also appealed to their sense of national pride, humiliated after World War II. Unlike his Communist rivals, Hitler was able to mobilize the German people behind him by restoring a sense of pride, marrying notions of nationhood with the alleged superiority of the Aryan race. For him neither democratic individualism nor Communist collectivism should prevail, but the “folk” community of an Aryan German nation. Although Hitler’s message was largely rhetorical to inculcate Aryan Germans to act as he wished under his leadership, it was also relational. He designated himself as Fuehrer which I believe translates as father. He therefore persuaded Germans to regard him as their national father. Winston Churchill Hitler’s adversary for most of World War II, British Prime Minister Churchill also sought to uplift his nation, however in a very different way with different tactics. His facial features, reminiscent of a British bulldog, conveyed a sense of steely determination. His greatest assets aside from his painstakingly hard work, were his ability to analyze and predict the course of world events long before most others and to deliver eloquent but inspirational speeches sometimes laced with sarcasm of his foes especially Hitler. ( winstonchurchill.org) It is a sad irony that in spite of his amazingly COMMUNICATION-PERSUASION PARADIGM accurate predictions and oratorical gifts, generally he was not effective as a messenger except in times of national crises, at least until the later years of his career. When he first warned of the dangers of both the rise of Nazism and Communism he was dismissed, even ridiculed. Yet in the darkest days when Britain was threatened with German invasion his predictions had earned him credibility and after years in the political wilderness the British electorate turned to Churchill to lead the resistance effort in spite of offering nothing but “blood, sweat and tears” until victory was won. Like Hitler he was able to inspire his country to achieve, but very unlike Hitler he did not marginalize and destroy scapegoats to do so. Instead he inspired all his citizens to fight and destroy the common enemy. Jesus Christ Even if one is a follower of another religion, agnostic, or atheist it is difficult to argue that He was not the greatest persuader of all time (jesuschristianity.com). After all 2000 years after His earthly life millions of Christians profess to follow his teachings. This is in spite of the fact that he preached mainly to small groups without technologies of TV, radio, film, internet etc. to extend His range. We don’t know for sure what His appearance was, but the writings COMMUNICATION-PERSUASION PARADIGM about Him indicate He had great oratory skills, but not the harangue of Hitler nor the inspiring turn of phrase of Churchill. He is reputed to have usually spoken quietly with simple yet profound solutions to apparent moral dilemmas. He lived under the yoke of Roman occupation, but did not advocate attempting a violent overthrow. Instead His message was essentially one of love. Although He was a rhetorical messenger imploring people to live righteously and obey God’s commandments, in my view this was secondary to the relational aspect of his teachings. His primary goal was to establish relationships with people as an agent of God. For those with no hope of being able to extricate from Roman tyranny, He was able to persuade them to accept their fate with the promise of eventual deliverance to a promised land at least in Heaven if not in their earthly lives. He was effective because he lead by example, enhancing his credibility. Conclusion The 3 historical messengers I have chosen as examples obviously had very different messages. However they all possessed impressive oratory skills. This attribute along with audiences psychologically ready to accept their messages made them very effective persuaders. References 1). Simons, Herbert W. with Joanne Morreale and Bruce Gronbeck Persuasion in Society Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks retrieved from www. corwin.com/upm-data/2741-SimonsMarketingSample.pdf. 2) “1937 Speech on Anniversary of Coming to Power” (English) Some Key Speeches of Adolf Hitler retrieved from www.worldfuturefund.org 3).A Historical Adolf Hitler Speech ( with English Subtitles retrieved from www.youtube.com/watch?v=eGhdYIS13KY 4)The Churchill Centre and Museum at the Churchill War Rooms retrieved from www.winstonchurchill.org 5) “Jesus Impact” Who Is Jesus retrieved from www.jesuschristianity.com. Read More