SPC 4680 Spring 2022Essay #2: Rhetorical Situation as Visual Appeal
Due Date: 3/6 (one day extended).Min. words 1250
Syllabus: “Your second essay is a critique of a piece of visual rhetoric on basis of L. Bitzer’s essay, The
Rhetorical Situation (posted on Canvas).
I would like you to analyze a visual photography/political advertisement [magazine or video] or an Instagram
photo (from a public source) in order to address its attempt to persuade.
More specifically, using some of the key postulates of Bitzer’s rhetorical situation, critique how the artifact in
question attempts to modify a rhetorical situation. You will want, of course, to determine just what the
“exigence” is that creates the rhetorical situation for the ad. The selection of ads is up to you. Please include a
link/copy of the visual artifact used. Reference for the ad and verification of the site/location of the ad:
mandatory. 1250 words min. (4-5 pages) Guidelines Provided.
Additional Guidelines for Essay #2
RHETORICAL SITUATION
This essay intends to familiarize you with Bitzer’s “Rhetorical Situation” as a method for analyzing a visual
text/artifact (advertisement, magazine, short video). One additional suggestion: look for an artifact that might
present issues that are NOT for commercial use, rather for changing of attitudes, beliefs, etc. One such example
can be a video to convince you on the need to act: (donate money for a cause; or to change the attitude about
smoking, or enroll in a political action, etc).
Consider the following as part of the format:
a.
A brief description, in your own words, of the artifact selected along with the justification of your
choice.
b.
Provide a description of how the text elements and the visuals [ads, pictures, videos] are connected, if
at all. (FORMAT/ARRANGEMENT)
c.
Present Bitzer’s method as listed in the article “Rhetorical Situation” and explain what “exigence,
audience, and constraints” mean in his view.
d.
Explain the EXIGENCE to create such visual images as language, and describe in your view whether
the ad/movie/video responds to the ‘urgency’ with a rhetorical message. Is this appropriate? Does the artifact
utilize rhetorical signs/images/language in a manner that is appropriate and/or effective? Does this artifact
address the situation?
What kind of emotion/logical/ethical response is intended to be created in people/audience?
e.
Consider explaining what are the CONSTRAINTS for this artifact/text/video/image in your view? Are
they addressed? Explain CLEARLY what is the purpose of this artifact and what are some of the possible
faults/deficiencies/issues that could be addressed better.(PURPOSE- to Persuade/to instructor inform/ to
entertain, which one is the most powerful purpose as presented in the site?)
f.
Who is the AUDIENCE? Here you need to look at the following:
i.
ii.
iii.
g.
The audience that is already interested/influenced by the topic and/or the site itself.
Audience members who will NOT be influenced by the site, and why, in your opinion?
Who are the most possible Audience members that MIGHT be influenced by this site? In
other words, who could be rhetorically persuaded/influenced on basis of the way the artifact is
presented to the public.
Your overall opinion whether this is a rhetorically good or rhetorically poor artifact, in terms of its
ability to influence people in their values/beliefs/interests.
Student Sample
Essay #2: Rhetorical Situation
In early 2017, parts of South Sudan declared a state of famine and with this declaration,
the estimated death of approximately 1.4 million children. The need for humanitarian aid in
response to this tragedy prompted The United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) USA to release
a video appealing to those around the world to not only donate in support of their efforts to
bring this much needed aid to South Sudan, but to Somalia, Nigeria and Yemen as well. Their
video calls for immediate action now by claiming it is integral to the reversal of the entirely
reversible man-made disaster. The video recalls that when six years prior, the same threat
loomed, promising similar result, one hundred thousand children died because the world (the
audience) did not act soon enough. This essay will analyze UNICEF USA’s video and its rhetorical
effectiveness based on Lloyd F. Bitzer’s The Rhetorical Situation. I chose this video because true
to Bitzer’s argument, it presented a strong exigence I felt would move an audience enough to
act. There are not many who could remain unaffected after seeing the plight of children going
hungry. The following paragraphs will examine how UNICEF USA persuades in light of the
famine.
In Bitzer’s article, he discusses the rhetorical situation as a combination of events, time
and place which consists of an exigence. Further, he posits that each rhetorical situation is
comprised of three constituents: exigence, audience and constraints. The exigence firstly, is
affectable if discourse in response to it is introduced to an audience with the goal of effecting
some kind of change. Moreover, it functions as the extremely urgent driving force to bring
about this change. It not only requires a response in the form of discourse but invites one given
the immediacy of the issue. In addition, audience and constraints are explained. In his
delineation of the three constituents, he defines the rhetorical audience as only the people who
can actually make the change produced by the discourse. So, for example, if a serious issue
arose in the United States and the necessary action to modify the situation was to vote, the
audience would consist only of American citizens. He takes care to distinguish between other
audiences because the major point here is that those in the audience must not only receive the
information, they must also be able to act on it. Lastly, he describes constraints as anything
with the power to restrict decision or action to modify the exigence. Specifically, Bitzer names
persons, events, objects and relations as constraints, broken down further into examples such
as images, traditions and attitudes among several other factors. Briefly, as long as something
has the potential to restrict the audience’s action as it relates to the situation, it can be deemed
a constraint. In this paper, I will use Bitzer’s discussion of rhetorical situation as a lens through
which to analyze and critique UNICEF USA’s use of rhetorical tools to achieve their purpose.
Understanding the exigence, audience and constraints of this artifact help to drive the
analysis and better understand the situation. First, although audience and constraints are
important to Bitzer, he emphasizes the exigence quite a bit in his essay. Going by his emphasis
on its importance to the discourse and situation, we can assume that the noted exigence must
be one that adequately communicates urgency, consequence and the need for (prompt) action
in response. UNICEF USA’s video is persuasive is several ways, specifically through its specific
exigence of the imminent large-scale death of children and the famine that will see to its
realization. As a globally recognized non-profit organization focused on the well-being of
children, UNICEF USA as the vehicle for this message establishes the credibility of the threat to
life and the number of children that will be affected – it is significant enough to warrant their
intervention. The inclusion of a quantifiable threat (1.4 million deaths) is similarly moving. As
Bitzer explains “an exigence which strongly invites utterance” (62) is necessary for a rhetorical
situation. While we can reasonably assume that adults will also be in danger of this famine, it is
the focus on the children that is particularly moving. As social creatures, humans are subject to
our emotions, often persuaded to action by them. To address the situation, UNICEF USA makes
use of this common knowledge by sharing footage of dangerously underweight and
malnourished children held by who we assume to be their mothers. Both child and parent
appear sad, tired or hopeless. I think this video deliberately and appropriately does this through
closing the distance between the audience and the exigence. Put more simply, the visual
elements have a greater emotional impact on the audience compared to mere text – where
there is a face to accompany the tragedy, it is more moving than only hearing or reading about
that tragedy. The famine is no longer a continent away, it is right in front of you. In so doing,
UNICEF USA elicits an emotional response and also frames the issue as an ethical one. Now that
we are aware of this famine, how can we not assist? Further, this enables the audience to
sympathize or empathize with these people. I think making both types of appeals improves the
chances of the audience donating.
The rhetorical audience is an important measure of success for rhetorical situations. To
reiterate, the audience is comprised of anyone who has the power to modify a rhetorical
situation by action or decision. Thus, as UNICEF USA seeks to persuade its audience to donate,
we must consider who constitutes that audience and some constraints acting in this situation.
Determining the audience for this situation is fairly complicated. Going by Bitzer’s definition
and keeping in mind that this branch of UNICEF is based in the United States, I believe the
audience would be anyone living in America that has the funds to donate to the cause.
However, since we assume the video is available only online and not via television, the
audience could extend to others outside of America including Americans and non-Americas
living abroad. Ironically, herein lies the first potential for a constraint. There are some
worldwide who hold very negative attitudes toward America and Americans. Consequently, it is
quite possible that even though the call is not to assist Americans, the fact that it comes from
UNICEF USA may present a resistance to the message however noble the cause. Naturally,
there would be some among the audience who would be more or less likely to be influenced by
the message put forward. Of the former, I would imagine for example, persons already
interested in humanitarian initiatives, religious persons, parents, and teachers of small children.
Those with already established interest in humanitarianism like volunteers would be included
here. In contrast, individuals such as certain lawyers or accountants who may have a better idea
of behind-the-scenes action at charities or relief organizations may hold some doubt as to
whether their donation actually reaches the person(s) for whom it is intended. With past
reports of such donations being misused and misappropriated, this could be a strong deterrent
for these individuals and therefore a constraint worth considering. Also, there is a call for
donations, but there is nothing to say what these donations will be used for. If they already
have the belief that their money will not be used according to their intention, they will likely
not donate at all. Unfortunately, the mentioned constraints are not addressed.
A credit to the video and its persuasiveness is the arrangement of elements in such a
way that in addition to communicating the issue at hand, also acts to move the audience to
action. Although there is no mention of a drought, the included images of a dry and lifeless
African landscape work as a mirror somewhat reflecting the destitution faced by the citizens of
South Sudan. Coupled with footage of actual children (especially) and families who have fallen
victim to the extensive lack of food makes an emotional appeal to the audience to ultimately
heed the call at the end of the video – to donate. In the same way, the text placed against the
visual imagery is simple enough to clearly present the issue to anyone as well as to effectively
communicate their (the audience) responsibility in helping to alleviate it. Mainly displayed in
white, key words are displayed in yellow for emphasis. For example, in phrases such as “it’s
happening again…”, the word “again” is emboldened after the video first references the famine
in 2011 and the audience’s inaction in response. Emphasizing this word here extends a second
chance for humanity to act where it did not before, to make a difference this second time and
affect the outcome. The exigence here is strengthened because one, such a large-scale famine
has already affected thousands of children in the past and two, it could happen again. The
emphasis all at once presents the urgency to the audience and prepares them for the call to
action – what steps they can take toward a solution. To move the audience enough to a point
where each person understands the importance of acting to remedy the situation, the video
conjures up a similar situation from six years earlier. At least one hundred thousand children
died from a famine “because the world did not act soon enough.” It effectively discounts the
idea that this tragedy is out of our control – is an act of fate or destiny as we often think of
these things – and places it in the hands of everyday people to which the video appeals.
Essentially, it implies that if we act and donate to UNICEF USA, we can prevent these deaths –
that it need not ever happen as result of famine as the audience has the ability to “alter reality”
(61).
Other examples of emphasized words are “children”, “death” and “cannot”.
Respectively, they evoke sympathy from the audience in response to the age of the potential
victims; communicate the direness of the consequences if there is no action; and affix the
responsibility to the audience, essentially implying that we have the power to change the
outcome, to alter reality. Even the inclusion of ellipses at the end of select lines of text serves a
function. In contrast to communicating finality (imminent death), with the use of the ellipses
the video also communicates uncertainty, possibility and opportunity. The juxtaposition is akin
to Bitzer’s mention of a necessary question and answer in rhetorical situations. As he puts it, “a
rhetorical situation must exist as a necessary condition of rhetorical discourse, just as a
question must exist as a necessary condition of an answer” (63). In this context, the question is
the death of numerous children following a famine while the answer is the discourse presented
by UNICEF. If they are successful in this, everyday people can wholly prevent the issue or put
an end to it if already started.
Overall, I think this video was very compelling. Rhetorically, I felt that it demonstrated
a dire enough need to provoke action, a clear enough understanding of what the issue was
and how it could be remedied. The pairing of moving video, diction and emphasized text
demonstrated to the audience their power to enact change in response to an issue that could
potentially affect thousands. It achieved a balance of urgency and uncertainty, effectively
communicating the need for quick action on the audience’s part to prevent the deaths of
children, in addition to opportunity that would enable the audience to take this action. Very
clearly, UNICEF showed the problem at hand and how the audience could help. Where it fell
slightly is in its mistake not to explain how donations would be used. We could assume it
would be to buy food from elsewhere, but even if the intention of every aid worker there
was pure, I believe this would have done more to instill some faith in the audience or at least
to put some at ease. Based on Bitzer’s idea of rhetorical situation, this artifact was effective.
Word Count.
Works Cited
Bitzer, F. Lloyd. “The Rhetorical Situation. pp. 60-68.
“Four Famines in Nigeria, Somalia, South Sudan and Yemen Loom.” YouTube, uploaded by
UNICEF USA, 21 March 2017, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XztR6g-LRRE&t=1s.