In January 2012 Helle Thorning Schmidt held her inaugural address at the transfer of the Presidency in the EU parliament. Morten Messerschmidt, as we know, is opposed by the EU, then held a speech in which he criticized Thorning and the EU in general. Many found his speech very provoking and inappropriate. Using a rhetorical critical perspective and a qualitative analysis, I try to understand the speechs many aspects. Specifically, I will try to come up with an idea of what aspects of Messerschmidt’s speech can be categorized respectively as good or bad rhetoric from partly the neo-Aristotelian efficiency criterias and from partly normative criterias. In my conclusion I find that Morten Messerschmidt's speech is both good and bad rhetoric. I find it good because it is very effective. It creates resistant internal images in the mind of the recipient, and it adapts effectively to the rhetorical audience (the recipient). Messerschmidt uses distortion to win support for his clamis. Due to that I also find his rhetoric bad. It does not appeal to the audience in an a way that makes them able to decide issues on an informed basis.
|Educations||Communication Studies, (Bachelor/Graduate Programme) Undergraduate or graduate|
|Publication date||26 Sep 2012|
- Retorisk kritik