Chapter 1

Public Speaking and

Communication

in the Real World

Communication has changed in the 21^st century.

 Simple conversation is not as prevalent as it once was. conversations with students in a year, but I now average more than a thousand e–mail exchanges per year with students. 

 The onslaught of electronic communication due to personal computers has had a tremendous impact on the decline of writing and organizational skills.

Misconceptions about Public Speaking

The overwhelming perception of public speaking is that the primary objective is for one to overcome the tremendous obstacle of standing before a group of his/her peers and saying something
without feeling awkward or embarrassed. Obviously, there is much more to public speaking than “just getting up there and talking.”

Certainly, effective public speakers must be able to put thoughts together coherently and in a particular order that is suitable to meet their objectives. Public speaking requires skill,
practice, and experience.

Another misconception about public speaking is that it is primarily about talking. However, public speaking is based on a two–way process that includes listening and responding.
Listening plays a large and important role in public speaking as it does in all other forms of communication. Listening and critical thinking skills are essential to effective communication.

It should be noted that a good listener will pay as much attention to the nonverbal communication of the speaker as to the words being used.

Public Speaking and Conversation

Good conversation, like a good speech, is not just “talking.” Public speakers spend a great deal of time preparing to address others, but good conversationalists also think about what they will say.

Some conversations are planned, but not at the level of a formal or even informal speech. Conversations, like speeches, can be formal or informal.

President Abraham Lincoln is remembered for his remarkable public speaking, but he was perhaps even more accomplished at conversation. Lincoln used his skills as a conversationalist to
become a brilliant public speaker and he was able to speak to anyone anywhere.

The public speaker is often physically and distinctly separated from others involved in the public speaking process. The public speaker is typically at the front of the room, behind a podium, on a
stage, or in some other physical position that causes that separation. Listeners in a speech setting are not expected to interact verbally until after the speech is over.

Greedy, or self–absorbed, listeners can be a bad thing in interpersonal relationships, but a good thing in a public speaking setting. The speaker wants the listener to take information away from the presentation.
Otherwise, what is the point of imparting the information?

The Study of Rhetoric

Public speaking is rooted in the study of rhetorical communication, which has been around almost as long as humans have been able to talk. Rhetoric, which has been pondered from the times of Plato
and Aristotle to the present, has many definitions. Simply stated, rhetoric is the study, art, and practice of the efficient and effective use of language or symbolic expression. In classic rhetoric, it is the
facility of influencing the thought and behavior of an audience. The definition that best suits the objectives of this book is summed up very well by Professor Andrea A. Lunsford, who stated:
“Rhetoric is the art, practice, and study of human communication” (Eidenmuller, 2008).       

The earliest book on rhetoric was The Precepts of Ptah–Hotep by Ptah–Hotep c. 2200 B.C.E. It is a collection of maxims focusing on human relations and the peaceful virtues of kindness,
justice, truthfulness, moderation, and self–control. Ptah–Hotep was a vizier, or counselor, to King Izezi of the Fifth Dynasty in Egypt. McCroskey traces rhetorical history from that point forward.
Most of our rhetorical tradition originated in Greece and was later refined by the Romans. Corax and Tisias are considered the founders of Greek rhetoric and the first sophists, or teachers, of rhetoric.
Some scholars contend that Corax and Tisias are one person or even the result of legend, as our knowledge of them, particularly Corax, comes from later authors Plato, Aristotle, and Cicero.
Corax is said to have invented an art of rhetoric to allow ordinary men the ability to state their own cases in the courts. Tisias, a student of Corax, is said to have developed legal rhetoric further
and he is believed to have been the teacher of Isocrates. Corax and Tisias were the first to organize messages into what we know as the introduction, body, and conclusion.

Protagoras of Abdara was an original Greek sophist, who became known as the Father of Debate. Protagoras believed that every proposition consisted of two sides and that effective speakers
should be prepared to argue on either of the two sides. McCroskey proceeds from Isocrates, Plato, Aristotle and his Rhetoric (from 330 B.C.) through the Roman period and then all the way to
modern times. Aristotle is also considered by many experts to be the Father of Speech Communication.

Public Speaking: Communication in the Real World

One would be hard pressed to find a professional endeavor in the real world that does not require effective communication to a great extent and public speaking to
perhaps a lesser degree.

As a student, you may misunderstand the most important fact about public speaking—that real communication involves far more than standing up and talking. It is
interpersonal and rhetorical communication.

Among factors or skills rated most important for successful job performance, interpersonal communication and teamwork skills also rank near the top.

To most college students, however, public speaking can be erroneously considered of no more use to them than all those history, math, and science courses.

In his 1984 autobiography, former Chrysler CEO Lee Iacocca attributed much of his success to communication in general and public speaking in particular. Iacocca observed:

“The only way you can motivate people is to communicate with them” (Iacocca & Novak, 1984, p. 53).

 Students taking public communication courses intend to major in a wide variety of disciplines, such as journalism and mass communication, advertising/public relations, business
(marketing, management, accounting), agriculture, medicine (physicians, nurses, pharmacists), the sciences (biology, chemistry, physics), engineering, liberal arts, etc. This is where the
real world purpose or professional objective of one’s communication comes into play. Shouldn’t students be allowed, even expected, to learn how to communicate effectively within their
chosen fields? Iacocca observed: “I’ve known a lot of engineers with terrific ideas who had trouble explaining them to other people. It’s always a shame when a guy with great talent can’t
tell the board or committee what’s in his head. More often than not, a [public speaking or other communication] course would make all the difference” (Iacocca and Novak, 1984, p. 54).

Public speaking classes teach future professionals poise under pressure. Professionals expect that they will be called upon on a regular basis to do extemporaneous speaking and presentations to
both small and large groups. Public speaking must be done with confidence, as professionals have the burden of showing a company’s credibility on a subject. In the business world, effective public
speaking is needed for presenting recommendations or proposals to your organization concerning what needs to be done in regard to projects or future planning. Public communication is likewise used
for recruiting, development, motivation and retention of staff members regarding company procedures.

The importance of effective public communication is obvious for certain professional pursuits, but some are not as obvious.          

 

---

What Is Communication?

Communication or Communications?

One of the problems with communication is that many people, including scholars in the field, tend to add an “s” to the end of the word. Dr. Gary Cronkhite (1984) offered us perhaps the best
explanation for leaving off the “s”. Cronkhite, an esteemed communication scholar, who was asked to review a book for the Quarterly Journal of Speech, became incensed by the editors’
use—or misuse in this case—of the word “communications.” Cronkhite (1984) wrote:

Unfortunately, referring to the study of communications is a widespread illiteracy in our field. Abstract conceptual nouns that refer to ideas, processes, or conditions cannot be pluralized by adding an “s” or “es.”
To attempt to do so, when it does not produce total nonsense, engages the related concrete morpheme and, while it may appear to make sense, changes the basic meaning. Consider that those who study radio,
television, and press do not necessarily study radios, televisions, and presses; students of journalism are not students of journalisms, scholars engage in scholarship, not scholarships; biologists study life, not lives;
medical students study medicine in general, and medicines only occasionally; nutritionists study nutrition, not nutritions; attorneys study justice, not justices; and Tolstoy’s book was titled War and Peace,
fortunately, not Wars and Peaces. Theorists of communication may occasionally analyze specific messages, or communications, but that is not the name of their field of study. (p. 473)

The Communication Process

Because interpersonal communication is typically seen as dyadic, or as an interaction between two persons, many students don’t seem to understand that public speaking is also a
form of interpersonal communication.

Mass communication is also human communication with a focus on mass media, such as radio, TV, film, books, magazines, newspapers, and perhaps even the Internet.

Basic Interpersonal Communication Model (See diagram in textbook)

In the basic interpersonal communication model, the sender, also known as the source, is the person who initiates the communication process. The sender may be a public speaker or
just an acquaintance, friend, family member, coworker, or stranger. In mass communication, the sender may be an announcer, an author, an actor, etc. The receiver, or respondent, is
the person or persons with whom the sender/source has initiated the communication. In a dyadic, or two–person, communication situation, the receiver is the other person involved. In a
public speaking or public communication situation, the audience is made up of receivers. The numbers can vary from a few to a few hundred. The speaker may use only his/her voice or
may need a public address system. In mass communication, there could be literally hundreds, thousands, millions, or even billions of receivers.

In dyadic communication or public speaking, the channel, or a means of sending or receiving information, is both verbal communication (the spoken word) and nonverbal communication
(gestures and one’s appearance). Sometimes nonverbal communication is referred to as body communication, but it is not body language. Language is communicated verbally via humans
employing discretionary sounds transmitted via vocal articulation in standard ways with standard meanings.

The participants in the communication setting are in the physical presence of each other. Again, public communication may require a public address system, but mass communication would need
a mass medium to channel the information—such as radio, TV, film, books, magazines, newspapers, etc. In a dyadic or public communication setting, the source can get direct verbal and nonverbal
feedback (responses) from the receiver(s). The source and receiver can see each other’s reactions, such as smiling, frowning, laughing, applauding, etc. Delayed feedback may take the form of
ratings, phone calls, e–mail, subscriptions (or cancellations thereof), letters to editors, movie revenue and reviews, book sales and reviews, etc.

There are those who believe a phenomenon called communication breakdowns exists, but it is a concept that is greatly misunderstood. As interpersonal communication expert Julia Wood (2007) observed:
"We cannot not communicate” (p. 29). Wood added: “Even when we don’t intend to communicate, we do so” (p. 29). There is probably no such thing as a communication breakdown, but there
are barriers to effective communication. Whether the communication act is interpersonal or mass, there is frequently interference in the channel. Noise, also known as interference, is a
barrier that can be caused by misunderstandings when communication participants don’t share meaning (semantic noise), when there are physical interference or problems (channel noise), or
when psychological and/or emotional interference is present. With both channel noise and semantic noise, communication is impeded.

Channel noise is a kind of interference that occurs due to some physical barrier and is mostly due to our senses of smelling, touching, tasting, hearing, and seeing. There are many examples of
channel noise, including laughing, talking, coughing, sneezing, snoring. Someone can walk between the speaker and audience, leave to go to the restroom, stand between audience members and
a screen, overhead projector, etc. The cable TV going out, the electricity going off, or a tape or disc fouling up can cause channel noise. It can occur in print media with smeared print, writing on
a page, or part of a page missing. The channel noise can be inside the setting or outside (external noise), such as aircraft flying over the building, a lawnmower outside the window, people yelling
or talking loudly in the hallways or outside windows, a booming car stereo system. It can be someone walking between another person and a television set or someone standing up or exiting an
aisle at a movie theater or a ballgame. In a class, their own note taking may distract students. Sometimes it is better to listen more and write less. The speaker can create barriers, too, through
appearance, voice, and annoying mannerisms. Note these things as you watch your fellow students speak. Perhaps the speaker is wearing a ball cap, t–shirt, and flip–flops. Will a rational audience
really take the person seriously as he/she tries to convince them that the minimum drinking age should be lowered to either 18 or 19 years of age? Will an audience tend to think that a person with a
speech impediment may be less intelligent than other speakers? Some bias cannot be overcome, but we may be just as distracted by someone who has a good voice but who mispronounces words
and uses poor grammar—things which can easily be corrected. Likewise, the speaker may be one who drums on the lectern with her fingers or it might be someone who jingles the keys in his pocket.
Perhaps the speaker does not make effective eye contact. There can be any number of reasons that the person distracts the audience.

Semantic noise occurs when the sender and receiver don’t share meaning. They might have a different frame of reference. According to the Apostle Paul as quoted from
1 Corinthians 14:9 in The Living Bible, “if you talk to a person in some language he doesn’t understand, how will he know what you mean? You might as well be talking to an
empty room.” Sometimes even those who share a language will not understand one another, especially if there is a knowledge gap or if colloquialisms are employed. There may
even be a contradiction between verbal and nonverbal communication. Two people can use the same language or words, but have different meanings for what they say. Educational
level and dialects can both cause barriers in the communication process. Perhaps you have had a professor that uses words that you don’t understand because students use many words
differently than do professors. Even though you may both speak English, there are some words that one may use and that another doesn’t. Some of the problem could be due to differences
in education and age. Most people in the U.S. speak English, but we have so many cultural influences and dialects that there are semantic problems. This is nothing new, as each generation
has come up with its own jargon. However, until one learns how these words and terms are used, semantic problems will exist.

Frequently, when parties who speak different languages encounter each other, more emphasis is placed on nonverbal communication with bigger and more enhanced gesturing occurring.
Sometimes the communicators begin to speak more loudly, as though that might somehow help in overcoming the problem. Who knows what the receiver is thinking, but it is probably along
the lines of: “I’m not deaf, you stupid person; I just speak a different language.” There are also incidences when one might even try—subconsciously or consciously—to imitate the accent of the other person.

Psychological noise and emotional noise also present barriers to communication. Nervousness and anxiety can be barriers in a communication situation, as can tension that may be
caused by controversy or conflict. A speaker might use words or phrases that may be perceived negatively by the audience. The topic itself can be controversial or antagonistic to an
audience whose individuals will automatically be biased from the outset of the speech. At the other extreme is the boring speaker, boring topic, or both. It isn’t long before audience
members are daydreaming. A certain amount of daydreaming is always going to occur, but the effective communicator can eliminate a great deal of it by being prepared and by
mentally and emotionally involving the audience in the speech.

When coming up with a topic, always consider the audience’s interest level. If they don’t like the topic, they won’t listen. Therefore, effective speakers will be
audience–centered, meaning that they will seek to maintain the audience’s interest.

Some people try to disguise their inattentiveness by faking attention. That probably isn’t a bad thing for the sake of student speakers, but it can be a problem in other situations.

It is possible that some people just don’t like some speakers. In such case, some audience members will not pay attention to the speaker no matter what the message is.
As noted earlier, it could be due to the speaker’s appearance, speaking voice, or some other unexplainable reason. In other words, some people just do not like other people.
They might not even be able to understand or explain why they don’t like someone else.

Lasswell’s “Act of Communication”

American political scientist Harold Dwight Lasswell was a pioneer in communication research who used content analysis, which he developed, to investigate World War I propaganda messages. Everett Rogers (1994), a communication scholar and historian, defined content analysis as “the investigation of communication messages by categorizing message content into classifications in order to measure certain variables” (p. 214). Lasswell, through his vast research analyzing content of propaganda messages, offered another way to look at the communication model. Lasswell (1948), who focused on the effect of the communication message, stated:

        A convenient way to describe an act of communication is to answer

        the following questions:

        Who

        Says What

        In Which Channel

        To Whom

        With What Effect? (p. 37)

 If one compares Lasswell’s model with the aforementioned interpersonal communication model, it is obvious that his question provides a succinct summation of the communication process.
“Who” would be the sender or source, the person who begins the communication act. “Says what” is the message being sent. “In which channel” refers to the method
of delivery, such as the spoken word, a microphone, a television set, etc. “To whom” is the receiver, who then becomes a respondent. That leads to feedback that would tell the
source “with what effect” the message had on the receiver. Indeed, the last part of Lasswell’s question may well be the most important part of the equation. A lot of a message’s effectiveness
will be due to how well the speaker can overcome the barriers, noise, and interference we discussed in the previous section.

Lasswell (1948) also suggested communication serves three vital functions in society. The first is to survey the environment to discover the dangers and opportunities in one’s surroundings.
In public speaking, this would encompass audience analysis, as effective public speakers are audience–centered. The second is to correlate responses to those challenges and dangers, meaning
the speaker needs to formulate a message for that audience. The third is to transmit “social inheritance,” or culture (p. 51). Rogers (1994) noted: “Later communication scholars added a fourth
function of communication: entertainment. These four functions are still taught to students enrolled in most introductory courses in communication” (p. 223).

The Speaking Situation and Context

Communication always takes place in a context that affects the nature and intent of one’s messages. That is why it is so difficult later to tell about something that happened.
We sometimes end up saying, “Well, I guess you had to be there.”

Rhetorical scholar Lloyd Bitzer (1968) noted that rhetoric occurs in a particular situation. According to Bitzer, the rhetorical situation consists of “a complex of persons, events,
objects, and relations presenting an actual or potential exigence which can be completely or partially removed if discourse, introduced into the situation can so constrain human decision or
action as to bring about a significant modification of the exigence” (pp. 1–14). Bitzer believed the rhetorical situation normally has five constituents: the exigence
(or pressing or urgent need/requirement), the audience, the constraints, the speaker, and the speech.

Anthony Hillbruner (1966), a contemporary of Bitzer, considered those conditions outside the speech and those concerned with the actual speech. For Hillbruner, the audience and occasion
were two important components of the “total speaking situation” (p. 31). “The times,” and “the composition of the audience and the reason for the occasion,” are important in effectively
evaluating the speaker’s persuasiveness (p. 31). Bitzer (1968) agreed that the rhetorical audience should be investigated, because members of the audience “function as mediators of change” (p. 7).

Ethical Considerations in Public Speaking

What are ethics? Ethics involve moral principles or rules of conduct. Basically put, ethics are concerned with philosophical issues of what is right and what is wrong. S.E. Frost (1942, 1962),
author of Basic Teachings of the Great Philosophers, observed: “…throughout the history of man’s thought we discover the problem of good and evil (which we speak of as ‘ethics’ or
‘the ethical problem’) persistently challenging each philosopher” (p. 81). Rhetorical specialists A.M. Tibbetts and Charlene Tibbetts (1987) added: “From the time of the ancient Greeks, authorities
in rhetoric have pointed out that the arguer’s character is very important. The Greek word for ‘character’ was ethos, and a writer (or speaker, in ancient times) whose work showed him to be honest,
fair, and reasonable was said to be employing ethical proof. As Cato, a Roman, put it, an orator should be ‘a good man skilled in speaking.’” (p. 318).

There are those communicators who pay little attention to ethical implications. Giambattista Vico, professor of rhetoric at the University of Naples from 1699 to 1741,
was one of the earlier educators to lament a lack of focus on ethics.

Ethics come into play from the time one plans a speech to the time it is presented to an audience. As a speaker, you should always be prepared. There is nothing more
uncomfortable in a classroom setting than watching a person try to fake his/her way through a speech. Unlike a paper, which a professor would read privately, the entire
class can tell when a speaker is ill prepared to do the job. Be prepared or you will embarrass both yourself and your classmates. In the real world, such lack of preparedness
could be professional suicide. You can fail to land an account, lose an account, or otherwise not live up to your end of the bargain when you are unprepared.

It is also important to tell the truth.

Because speech topics are almost limitless, discretion is frequently required. For example, a speaker might give a speech that advocates the legalization of marijuana. There is nothing
wrong with that topic, but when a speaker steps before an audience there is an ethical obligation not to deceive the audience or to try to get them to do something that is illegal. Therefore,
the ethical speaker would not try to convince the audience to buy, sell, produce, or consume marijuana.

Greek philosopher Plato noted that in an ideal world all public speakers would be truthful and devoted to the good of society, but alas we recognize that is not the case. Hitler was a great
persuasive speaker, but he used his skills to achieve despicable objectives.

 

Although, as a listener, it might be difficult at times, try not to be prejudiced against a speaker. If for no other reason, give them an opportunity so that you are not unethical yourself.
The U.S. is a great country in part because we try to allow everyone a free and open exchange of ideas. We want to express ourselves, so we need to allow others the same chance.
Freedom of speech and expression, however, do not include name–calling and verbal abuse. We have all heard: “Sticks and stones may break my bones, but names will never hurt me.”
How untrue that statement is, because too often names and other verbal uttering are far worse than physical abuse.

 

---

The Fear Factor:
Dealing with
Communication Anxiety

Many times the real difference between success and failure in public speaking is confidence, or the lack thereof, that results in nervousness or anxiety.

There are those people who feel at ease and comfortable when communicating most of the time, but there are occasions when each of us can find ourselves feeling apprehensive in a
particular communication situation. Even a self–confident person may suddenly feel shy or awkward when giving a speech to a huge crowd, when going on television for the first time,
when asking for a date, or when proposing marriage. Such experiences are normal.

Many people are apprehensive about communicating with others and not just to groups and audiences but also in one-on-one conversation. Communication apprehension, or reluctance
to communicate with others, is common. Some individuals may be timid or bashful in general or they may suffer from shyness or anxiety that may be connected to speaking or performing in
front of others. Such a condition may also be known as stage fright. Others may run from or avoid public communication altogether resulting in stage flight. Trait apprehension is fear of
communication and state apprehension is specific to a situation.

Anxiety Is Normal

Anxiety and nervousness are normal and need not always be considered negatively, as they can be good. A certain amount of anxiety can keep one alert, sharp, and fresh.

Fear of Failure and Unrealistic Expectations

A primary reason that many people fear public speaking is that they are afraid to fail. Few are afraid of success. If one knew that he or she was going to make a perfect speech
with no mistakes, he/she wouldn’t be afraid. Unfortunately, no one is perfect and everyone makes mistakes, but it is not the end of the world. Once a speaker accepts that the
presentation will not be perfect, the anxiety will ordinarily begin to diminish.

Imperfection Equals Audience Identification

There is another way to look at imperfection that many people may not have considered. 90). Your audience expects humanity and imperfections, not a mistake-free speaker.

Check Your Ego—The Message Is the Important Thing

It is important to realize that the listener, or audience member, is typically not present for your speech because you are speaking. Rather, they are there to hear what you have to say.
Your message is what matters to them. Even Moses, the great religious leader, was afraid of public speaking. When God told him to take a message to Pharaoh, Moses argued in Exodus 6:28–30:
“I can’t do it; I’m no speaker—why would Pharaoh listen to me?” Rather than forcing Moses to speak, God told Moses’ brother Aaron what to tell Pharaoh (Exodus 7:2).
Eventually, Moses overcame his fear of speaking because he understood that he was not as important as the message. Deuteronomy records Moses’ February 15 speech to the
people of Israel after their exodus from Egypt 40 years earlier. Indeed, most students don’t go to lectures to hear the speaker, but to hear what the instructor has to say and to learn
that information. A congregation doesn’t necessarily attend church to hear the minister, but are there to hear the sermon. So, when you get up to speak in class, at the fraternity house,
at someone’s wedding, at work, etc., they aren’t paying so much attention to you as to what you have to say.

Focus on your words and not on your fear. Try not to think about anything other than your message and the impact it will have on the audience.

Certainly, public speaking class should be the last place for one to be nervous, as all students are in the basic public speaking course together. Your classmates do not see you up there speaking. Rather, they see themselves. If you stumble, they are pulling for you to get past it. They are for you—not against you. One should also realize that other students are probably focusing on giving their own speech, are recovering from the speech they just gave, or may simply be thinking about other things. Sometimes they just sit there in silence, trying to gather their own composure, calm, or cool. It is doubtful that you will remember all the speeches given just before or after yours, and the same applies to your fellow students.

Suggestions for Overcoming Anxiety

Focus your attention on a person in the audience who seems the most interested.

Be yourself.

Develop a pre–speech routine.

Self–fulfilling prophecy is something that actually happens because an individual does what is needed to make it happen. In other words, a person can predict that they will succeed and they will succeed. Another person might be so convinced that he/she will fail that failure becomes a reality.

Employ positive visualization.

Be prepared, practice, and rehearse your behavior.

When your time comes, get up there and speak.

 

---

The Interrelated Elements

of Purpose, Topic,

and Audience

Purpose, topic, and audience are three interrelated components. In order to develop an effective speech, the speaker must have a clear purpose or strategy in mind for what
he/she wants to accomplish with the audience.

Some experts believe that what a speaker says is of more importance than how a speaker says it. Such a premise is debatable, as others contend that how something is said is equally
as important as what is said.

Purpose is your aim, intention, or goal for your speech.

The Purpose: General and Specific

Why are you speaking? What is it that you want to achieve? How does it affect others? How is the audience going to be affected and how will it react?

Depending on whom one asks, there are usually two or three major purposes in public speaking: to inform, to persuade, and to entertain, which could fall under the
category of occasional speeches, meaning for a special occasion. Some would argue that another purpose is to motivate, but that would probably fall under the heading of
persuasive or even occasional speaking. Although entertainment is frequently integral to the occasional speech, entertainment should be an overall objective for most speaking
purposes, but it is not necessarily a major purpose. To entertain means to gain a pleasant response from the audience, which can be done by piquing their curiosity, by amusing
them, by keeping them in suspense, etc. So whether the purpose is to inform or to persuade, entertainment value (or audience interest) must be considered.

Informative speeches are essentially designed to share knowledge with the audience by demonstrating, explaining, defining, describing, reporting, or analyzing.
Persuasive speeches are formulated to accomplish one of several objectives: to convince, to reinforce, to elicit action, or to inspire. A speech to convince would
seek to alter the audience’s opinion about something. A speech to reinforce is one that motivates those already in agreement with our perspective. A speech of action
tries to get the audience to do something, such as to vote or to lose weight or to quit smoking. A speech to inspire seeks to stir the emotions of the audience.

After the speaker knows the general purpose of the speech, the specific purpose can be developed. Later, the speaker will formulate a central idea or thesis statement.
The specific purpose focuses on one aspect of a topic and takes the form of a single infinitive phrase, such as “To inform my audience about . . .” or “To persuade my audience to . . .”
 The objective of the specific purpose is to state what the speaker expects the listener to take from the speech. The speaker emphasizes what the audience is expected to understand,
to learn, to do, or how the audience is expected to act after hearing the speech.

 the specific purpose takes the form of an infinitive phrase and full sentence.

 the specific purpose is a statement and not a question

 the specific purpose to a single idea.

 the specific purpose should not be vague such as “To persuade my audience to go to movies.”

The Topic

Selecting a topic, or subject, for a speech is frequently difficult for students. On the surface, that may be surprising, but it is true.

Finding and Selecting Speech Topics

To come up with a topic, simply try to come up with one that is of interest both to the speaker and to the audience. One can start by brainstorming.

The Central Idea or Proposition

After selecting a purpose, specific purpose, and topic, you can then move on to the central idea or proposition, which is a way of previewing the main points of the speech.
The central idea or proposition may also be known as the thesis, the key statement, or the idea that controls the speech. The central idea keeps the effective speaker from wandering
or trying to cover too much ground.

The three types of central ideas and propositions are fact, value, and policy.

Fact is something that exists or has occurred; it is something that is true or real.

Value focuses on a judgment or subjective evaluation about an object or action. Value is not your personal opinion. If you say you enjoy something, then that is your personal taste and not a value.

Policy involves the need for a plan or specific course of action that should be taken by business leaders, legislators, politicians, etc., with the intent of influencing the decisions or actions
of others. Normally, the proposition for a policy speech would include the word “should.”

Title

A speech should have a title that is true to the speaker’s objectives.

The Audience

When designing a speech, it is imperative that the speaker understands to whom he/she will be directing their remarks because any good topic will be audience–centered.

Public speakers, or communicators, try to create a bond with their listeners (audience) by focusing on common values, goals, and experiences. The process is
that of identification. In other words, the speaker needs to understand what we discussed back in the communication model in Chapter 2—frame of reference.
Every speech contains two messages. There is the one sent by the speaker and the one received by the listener. As we say in interpersonal communication, meaning is not in the
message but in the receiver.

The kind of audience to whom you will be speaking can be determined through the use of demographics and psychographics. Demographics are the statistical characteristics
of human populations, such as age, sex, race, marital status, educational level, socioeconomic status, occupation, religion, political orientation, etc. Each of these characteristics
can have an impact on the effectiveness of the speech either considered alone or in combination with any or all of the other characteristics. Psychographics show us what
the audience members may have in common. It is the determination or measurement of their opinions, beliefs, and interests. Unlike demographics, psychographics describe
information about the audience’s opinions. Those opinions might have to do with views on gun control, the death penalty, bottled water, laundry detergent, etc. It is important to
remember that not everyone listening to our speeches can be persuaded to act as we want or will even be interested in what we have to say. Depending on the circumstances,
there are some general kinds of audiences that one might encounter. The most desirable audience, of course, is the favorable audience, which is made up of people who are
already convinced that they agree with the speaker. The neutral, or indifferent, audience is one that may be uninformed, undecided, or simply indifferent to what the speaker has
 to say. Hostile audience members are those who already know that they are not in agreement with the speaker or his/her position. We could also add the uninitiated audience to
this discussion. Uninitiated audiences contain those people who may have no idea about anything you may say. In such case, the speaker should understand that ahead of time
and plan accordingly by employing foundational or basic information.

In public speaking and in communication in general, one’s words—or language—can include or exclude others. Some experts refer to it as inclusion talk and exclusion talk.

To avoid excluding others, analyze the audience and adjust your words, or language, to accommodate as many audience members as possible.

Speeches, then, should be suitable for both an audience and for the speaker. If the speaker expresses little interest in a topic, then why should the audience be interested?

 

---