example of a speech critique

• PRO Courses Guides New Tech Help Pro Expert Videos About wikiHow Pro Upgrade Sign In
• EDIT Edit this Article
• EXPLORE Tech Help Pro About Us Random Article Quizzes Request a New Article Community Dashboard This Or That Game Happiness Hub Popular Categories Arts and Entertainment Artwork Books Movies Computers and Electronics Computers Phone Skills Technology Hacks Health Men's Health Mental Health Women's Health Relationships Dating Love Relationship Issues Hobbies and Crafts Crafts Drawing Games Education & Communication Communication Skills Personal Development Studying Personal Care and Style Fashion Hair Care Personal Hygiene Youth Personal Care School Stuff Dating All Categories Arts and Entertainment Finance and Business Home and Garden Relationship Quizzes Cars & Other Vehicles Food and Entertaining Personal Care and Style Sports and Fitness Computers and Electronics Health Pets and Animals Travel Education & Communication Hobbies and Crafts Philosophy and Religion Work World Family Life Holidays and Traditions Relationships Youth
• Browse Articles
• Learn Something New
• Quizzes Hot
• Happiness Hub
• This Or That Game
• Train Your Brain
• Explore More
• Support wikiHow
• About wikiHow
• Log in / Sign up
• Education and Communications
• Communication Skills
• Public Speaking

How to Critique a Speech

Last Updated: February 13, 2023 Approved

This article was co-authored by Lynn Kirkham and by wikiHow staff writer, Christopher M. Osborne, PhD . Lynn Kirkham is a Professional Public Speaker and Founder of Yes You Can Speak, a San Francisco Bay Area-based public speaking educational business empowering thousands of professionals to take command of whatever stage they've been given - from job interviews, boardroom talks to TEDx and large conference platforms. Lynn was chosen as the official TEDx Berkeley speaker coach for the last four years and has worked with executives at Google, Facebook, Intuit, Genentech, Intel, VMware, and others. There are 9 references cited in this article, which can be found at the bottom of the page. wikiHow marks an article as reader-approved once it receives enough positive feedback. In this case, 80% of readers who voted found the article helpful, earning it our reader-approved status. This article has been viewed 197,178 times.

A good speech critique helps build the speaker’s skills by honestly identifying areas for improvement in a constructive, encouraging manner. Offering a good critique can also benefit your own public speaking skills! This article lists several questions you should ask yourself while critiquing a speech’s content and the speaker’s delivery, then provides pointers for effectively sharing your findings.

Does the speech resonate?

• If possible, note audience reactions to the speech. Do they seem to understand it? Are they paying close attention or getting bored?
• Remember to view the speech from the perspective of the target audience, which can be a bit tricky if you’re not actually in the target audience. Use your best judgment.

Is the speech easy to follow?

• Is the introduction effective? Does the speaker make their primary argument apparent within the first few sentences, or does it take awhile before you figure out what they are getting at?
• Is the speech full of distracting tangents that do not relate to the primary topic, or does it build in a logical manner toward the conclusion?
• If you were to summarize the speech to someone else, could you recite all the main points or would you have trouble remembering what it was really about?

Is the speech convincing?

• Listen for clear evidence (like names, dates, statistics, and other data) that backs up the points the speaker is making. Take notes so you can do some fact-checking to make sure the evidence is accurate.
• Once you’ve evaluated the quality of the evidence, make sure it supports the arguments and analysis made in the speech. A truly convincing speech has to hit on both elements—solid evidence and strong analysis.

Is the speech entertaining?

• Does it start with a good hook? Good speeches usually start with a funny or intriguing point that draws the audience in.
• Does it stay engaging the entire time? Well-placed anecdotes and jokes can grab and keep listeners' attention.
• Are the anecdotes and jokes distracting, or do they help build the speaker’s argument?
• Does the speaker use examples judiciously? One really superb, memorable example is better than three that don't stick with the audience.

Does the speech have a strong closing?

• It’s natural for the audience’s focus to lag as the speech carries on, so the closing should regain their attention by being powerful, thoughtful, deep, and concise.
• Both the speech and the speaker should exude confidence during the conclusion. This helps the audience gain confidence in the presentation.

How is the speaker’s vocal delivery?

• A person who is speaking too loudly may seem aggressive, while one who is speaking too quietly may struggle to be heard. See if the person seems to have a good sense of how loudly to speak.
• Many speakers tend to speak too quickly without realizing it. See if the person is speaking at a pace that sounds natural and easy to understand.
• Well-placed and well-timed pauses help the audience digest what’s just been said and prepare for what’s about to be said. Pauses that are too short or non-existent don't give the audience these opportunities, while pauses that are too long are distracting.

How is the speaker’s body language?

• Make easy, natural eye contact with audience members scattered throughout the crowd. This helps every part of the audience feel included.
• Stand up confidently, but not stiffly, and without fidgeting too much.
• Use natural arm and hand gestures from time to time, especially to emphasize key points.
• When appropriate, walk around the stage in a confident but relaxed manner instead of staying behind the podium.

Is the speaker showing high anxiety?

• Note any repeated movements or gestures that take away from the content of the speech; these could be signs of nervousness.
• A shaky voice or tendency to mumble are also signs of nervousness.

Did they read, memorize, or master the speech?

• Mastering the speech allows the speaker to better engage with the audience and make adjustments “on the fly” without wrecking the speech’s flow.

Take notes during and after the speech.

• Instead of a blank notebook, you may instead want to jot down several key questions or areas of focus (like those listed in this article) as a checklist you can refer to during the speech. Make sure to also take notes to flesh out your checklist, though.
• If there are no restrictions against it and you have time, record video or just audio of the speech. Always get the permission of the speaker first. [12] X Research source

Critique the speech’s content first.

• Note which elements of the speech were interesting, which parts were confusing, and which areas need more references to back them up.
• Identify jokes or anecdotes that either really hit the mark or just didn’t work. It’s better to be honest now than to let the person tell the same bad joke twice!
• Note whether you felt the speech was appropriate for the intended audience.

Critique the speaker’s delivery second.

• If, for example, the speaker seemed really nervous, it’s important to point this out as a distracting element that blunted the impact of the speech. You might also constructively point out techniques that help reduce stage fright, like exercising before the speech, laughing before the speech, and practicing in front of a small group of people first.

Offer positive encouragement throughout.

• Try the feedback sandwich technique: give the person a compliment on an element of their speech, tell them what needs improvement, then give them another compliment. For example, tell them they started with a brilliant hook, then explain that the second point was confusing, and finish by noting how the conclusion clarified the main point. [16] X Research source
• As a way to encourage the person to keep learning and improving, you might suggest they watch videos of speeches given by famous speakers. Point out similarities and differences between the speech you’re critiquing and the famous speech.

Expert Q&A

• Use a standardized evaluation form, rating scale, or point system in a classroom setting or competition. This helps you assign a grade to the speech or decide who presented a better speech. Thanks Helpful 1 Not Helpful 0

You Might Also Like

• ↑ http://faculty.washington.edu/mcgarrit/COM220/online%20readings/Peer_Critique_Assignment_Description.pdf
• ↑ Lynn Kirkham. Public Speaking Coach. Expert Interview. 20 November 2019.
• ↑ http://www.uvm.edu/~cals183/spring2017/outside.html
• ↑ http://sixminutes.dlugan.com/speech-evaluation-1-how-to-study-critique-speech/
• ↑ https://www.psycom.net/glossophobia-fear-of-public-speaking
• ↑ https://hbr.org/2020/02/dont-just-memorize-your-next-presentation-know-it-cold
• ↑ http://sixminutes.dlugan.com/speech-evaluation-2-art-of-delivering-evaluations/
• ↑ https://www.toastmasters.org/magazine/magazine-issues/2016/oct2016/evaluation
• ↑ http://sixminutes.dlugan.com/speech-evaluation-3-modified-sandwich-technique/

About This Article

To critique a speech, start by evaluating whether or not the speaker made their argument apparent in the first few sentences of their speech. Then, decide if the rest of the speech supported that argument in a smooth, understandable manner. You should also focus on the speaker’s voice inflections, like speaking at a natural pace and knowing when to pause for effect. Additionally, evaluate their body language, which should project confidence with gestures like making eye contact and standing up straight without fidgeting too much. For more advice, including how to give constructive feedback in areas like credibility and emotional intelligence, keep reading. Did this summary help you? Yes No

• Send fan mail to authors

Reader Success Stories

Gabriel Martinez

Apr 5, 2017

Did this article help you?

Charlie Adolfo

Sep 22, 2016

Alex Flores

Sep 1, 2020

Featured Articles

Trending Articles

Watch Articles

• Terms of Use
• Privacy Policy
• Do Not Sell or Share My Info
• Not Selling Info

Don’t miss out! Sign up for

wikiHow’s newsletter

45 Critique Examples

Chris Drew (PhD)

Dr. Chris Drew is the founder of the Helpful Professor. He holds a PhD in education and has published over 20 articles in scholarly journals. He is the former editor of the Journal of Learning Development in Higher Education. [Image Descriptor: Photo of Chris]

Learn about our Editorial Process

A critique is an in-depth analysis and evaluation of a work, idea, or event. Critical evaluation is considered a higher-order thinking skill necessary for logical reasoning and development of new ideas.

Critique not only includes critical evaluation of content, but also an assessment of the structure, style, and effectiveness of a work or idea in achieving its purpose.

The importance of critique lies in its capacity to challenge assumptions, illuminate underlying ideologies, and promote critical thinking.

We need critical thinking skills in order to make sound judgments, develop well-formed opinions, and enhance our understanding of our world.

As such, critique is a valuable tool for academic, artistic, and professional contexts, driving innovation, improvement, and progress.

Critique Examples

1. assessing relevance.

Relevance is all about whether the point being made is valuable for the broader discussion or debate.

For example, bringing up stars in an astrology discussion is relevant; discussing the price of fish at the supermarket, on the other hand, is completely irrelevant to an astrology discussion!

In a critique, it is essential to evaluate whether the presented arguments and statements are pertinent to the core theme or purpose.If the content is irrelevant, it detracts from the main message, undermining the overall credibility and effectiveness of the work.

Assessing Relevance Example : The lecture on marine biology seemed out of place at a conference primarily focused on space exploration and astrophysics.

2. Evaluating Accuracy

Evaluating accuracy involves scrutinizing the factual correctness and reliability of the information or arguments presented in a work or idea.

Meticulous fact-checking is central to this evaluation process, ensuring that the claims made are based on accurate information.

Inaccurate or misrepresented facts can compromise the integrity of the work, and undermine its value to its audience or stakeholders. So, evaluating accuracy is a fundamental task in critique, contributing to the credibility and trustworthiness of the work.

Evaluating Accuracy Example : During the review of a book on World War II history, discrepancies were found between the dates mentioned in the book and the accepted historical timeline, bringing into question the book’s accuracy.

3. Analyzing Structure

Analyzing structure refers to the process of examining the arrangement or plan of a work or idea. This is common, for example, in the critical analysis of art and fashion.

This process could involve looking at how the various elements are organized and interlinked to form a coherent whole.

There are different conventions about what a well-structured work or idea looks like, depending on the discipline. For example, in fashion, it may have to do with how the clothing accentuates body features, whereas in non-fiction, it might be able how well a text presents logically ordered elements that enable easier understanding and following of the topic.

Analyzing Structure Example: In a film critique, the reviewer noted how the narrative structure, with flashbacks interspersed at strategic points, amplified the emotional impact and depth of the story.

4. Considering Originality

Originality refers to the creativity, novelty, or freshness brought to a work or an idea.

For a critique, weighing originality involves exploring whether the work or idea offers new perspectives, unique themes, or innovative methods. Or, in contrast, does the work simply repeat tired old tropes ?

The level of originality can greatly enhance the value of a work or idea by stimulating thought, provoking discussion, or advancing knowledge.

In many fields, such as art, literature, and academia, originality is a highly sought characteristic since it identifies works or ideas that break from convention and inspire progress.

Originality Example: In a critique of a music album, it was noted that the artiste successfully incorporated a blend of traditional folk and modern electronic music in their compositions, enhancing the album’s originality.

5. Questioning Sources

Questioning sources involves scrutinizing the origin and credibility of the evidence supporting a work or an idea.

Sources provide the foundation for arguments and assertions in a work, and their reliability and relevance are crucial for validity.

In a critique, evaluating sources helps ascertain the accuracy and integrity of the work, ensuring the information is well-founded and correctly attributed.

This is particularly important in academic and journalistic works wherein the veracity and reliability of sources significantly affect the overall validity and strength of the work.

Questioning Sources Example: During the peer-review of a scientific paper, one reviewer questioned the credibility of a non-peer reviewed website that the author had used extensively to support their arguments.

6. Examining Clarity

Examining clarity refers to checking the transparency, simplicity, and comprehensibility of a work or an idea.

Clarity ensures that the message or argument is effectively communicated to and understood by the audience. It helps avoid misunderstandings and misinterpretations.

In a critique, clarity examination entails assessing the work’s language, terminology, and style, evaluating whether these elements facilitate understanding.

A work displaying a high degree of clarity allows its audience to comprehend and engage with its content with relative ease.

Examining Clarity Example: The reviewer of a mystery novel observed that the author’s clear and concise writing style made the complex plot twists and clues easy to follow throughout the story.

7. Appraising Depth

Appraising depth is the examination of how profound a work or an idea is. In other words, has this person said something of meaning, or only scraped the surface of the concept?

A deep and thorough treatment of the subject matter suggests nuanced understanding, and often adds value to the work or idea.

I often tell my students that to achieve depth in essays, they need to consider the level of detail, context, compare-and-contrast, and insight they have provided. Furthermore, they might want to consider various perspectives related to the topic, not just one.

Appraising Depth Example: Upon analyzing an analysis of economic policy, it was recognized that the author’s in-depth exploration of varying socioeconomic impacts showed their deep understanding and research into the subject matter.

8. Reviewing Consistency

Reviewing consistency entails checking for the uniformity and reliability of the arguments, facts, and tone within a work or an idea.

Consistency is important because it lends credibility and cohesiveness to a work or idea. It shows that the author has a clear understanding and thoughtful execution of their topic or theme.

In a critique, consistency is assessed by observing the steadiness of the work’s arguments, use of evidence, and tone. Any inconsistencies detract from the overall quality and reliability of the work.

Reviewing Consistency Example : In a politician’s speech critique, it was noted that their stance concerning environmental policies remained consistent, maintaining the same core arguments throughout each policy discussion, lending strength to their overall position.

9. Assessing Feasibility

When we assess feasibility, we’re assessing whether something is really practical or viable. Quite simply, we’re asking: “will this actually work?”

Assessing feasibility can include exploring aspects such as financial considerations, available resources, and time factors.

This method is particularly useful for the critique of a proposal, business plan, or research project. A feasible work or idea has a much higher chance of achieving its intended outcome, making it more reliable and, in the case of business, attractive to stakeholders such as investors.

Exploring Feasibility Example: The critique of an ambitious development plan included an assessment of its feasibility. Given the budget constraints and tight timeframe, the plan was determined to be unrealistic in its current form.

10. Scrutinizing Aesthetic Appeal

Scrutinizing aesthetic appeal involves assessing the visual or sensory attractiveness of a work or idea.

This is significant especially in fields such as art, design, and literature where aesthetic attractiveness can greatly enhance the appeal and appreciation of the work.

In a critique, this might involve reviewing elements such as color, composition, style, form, and intricacy to determine how well they harmonize to create an appealing visual or sensory output.

Scrutinizing Aesthetic Appeal Example: In a review of a new architectural structure, the critic lauded the creative blending of traditional and modern design elements, which added to the aesthetic appeal of the building.

11. Measuring Efficiency

Measuring efficiency relates to the examination of how optimally resources were utilized.

In a critique, efficiency measurement can relate to various elements including workflow, process design, time allocation, use of labor, or use of technology, among other things. A highly efficient operation minimizes waste, reduces costs, and maximizes results.

Measuring Efficiency Example : In a critique of a production process, it was observed that by adopting automation, the company significantly improved its efficiency, allowing it to produce more units in less time.

12. Gauging Effectiveness

Gauging effectiveness is about determining the success of a work or an idea in achieving its intended purpose or objective.

This requires an examination of the outcomes, results, or impact of the work or idea relative to its stated goals.

In a critique, this will often require a summative assessment of performance measures. An advertising campaign, for example, may require a poll or consumer survey to get the results of how effective it was in increasing brand awareness.

Gauging Effectiveness Example: A critique of an educational program looked at student test scores, classroom engagement, and teacher feedback to gauge how effectively the program was in improving student learning outcomes.

13. Investigating Methodology

Investigating methodology refers to the critical examination of the strategies, techniques, or procedures employed in the formulation of a work or an idea. This is particularly common in academic critique.

For example, this means examining the soundness and relevancy of the chosen methods in achieving the objective or producing the required results. Why did the person choose qualitative over quantitative methods? Was that a good idea, or did they miss an opportunity in this choice? Did they defend their choice sufficiently?

A well-chosen and properly executed methodology supports the conclusions and enhances the integrity and trustworthiness of a work or idea.

Investigating Methodology Example: In a critique of a psychological study, the peer-review process involved questioning the appropriateness of the chosen experimental design and statistical analysis techniques, thus investigating the research methodology.

14. Probing Author Bias

Probing author bias deals with uncovering and examining the unstated beliefs, values, or principles of the author which influence their claims.

Take, for example, a media critique, where you realize that the person writing a newspaper article has an underlying self-interest in what they’re saying. For example, someone who writes an article denying climate change may also have a lot of shares in a coal company, so they’ve got self-interest and bias inherent in their writing.

Probing Bias Example: In a critique of an economic policy proposal, the critic highlighted the underlying assumption that economic growth always leads to improved social welfare, provoking a deeper debate on the correlation between growth and welfare.

15. Judging Coherence

Judging coherence involves assessing how well the different parts of a work or an idea logically fit together to form a meaningful whole.

Coherence is vital in ensuring that a work or idea makes sense to the audience and that the overall message or argument is clear and consistent.

In a critique, examining coherence may include looking at how arguments are structured, how information is sequenced, and how concepts relate to each other.

A highly coherent work or idea effectively communicates its message or purpose, making it easy for its audience to understand and follow.

Judging Coherence Example : While critiquing an academic essay, the evaluator noted high coherence since the arguments were logically ordered, well connected, and systematically built up to support the overall thesis.

Other Techniques for Critique

Media Critique

• Evaluating cultural sensitivity.
• Analyzing representation and inclusivity.
• Examining bias and objectivity.
• Considering emotional resonance.
• Assessing narrative flow.
• Investigating technical proficiency (e.g., in films: cinematography, editing).
• Evaluating character development and depth.
• Probing thematic depth and complexity.
• Gauging audience reception and feedback.
• Analyzing historical context and accuracy.

Academic Critique

• Evaluating research methodology .
• Assessing the adequacy of literature review.
• Analyzing the validity of conclusions.
• Inspecting the rigor of data analysis.
• Questioning the reliability of the instruments used.
• Investigating potential conflicts of interest.
• Examining the relevance and recency of cited sources.
• Gauging the scope and limitations of the study.
• Evaluating the theoretical framework and its application.
• Assessing the generalizability of the findings to broader populations.

Business Critique

• Analyzing financial viability and profitability.
• Evaluating the effectiveness of marketing strategies.
• Assessing organizational structure and hierarchy.
• Investigating ethical business practices.
• Gauging scalability and growth potential.
• Reviewing talent acquisition and retention strategies.
• Examining stakeholder and shareholder relations.
• Scrutinizing supply chain and operational efficiencies.
• Evaluating product or service innovation and differentiation.
• Analyzing competitive positioning and market share.

The Difference Between Critique and Criticism

Critique is a good-faith evaluation of a range of factors, positive and negative, to provide constructive feedback on a topic. Criticism is a fully negative evaluation that’s often interpreted as an attack in bad faith.

• Critique is generally viewed as a detailed, analytical assessment aimed at understanding and improving a work or idea. This process usually involves constructive feedback, evaluating the strengths and the weaknesses while offering enlightening perspectives for enhancement. Sometimes, we call it ‘ constructive criticism ‘.
• Criticism often bears a negative connotation, focusing mainly on pointing out faults and shortcomings, often without providing considerable insight for improvement or recognizing the positive aspects of the work or idea.

The act of critique is a powerful tool that adds depth to our understanding and interpretation of works or ideas. The multilayered aspects of critique, ranging from analyzing the structure to questioning underlying assumptions, work together to provide a holistic evaluation. It allows us to identify strengths, expose weaknesses, and ultimately discover ways to improve. Therefore, honing critique skills is critical for intellectual growth, creativity, and progression in numerous fields of study and professional arenas.

• Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd-2/ 15 Green Flags in a Relationship
• Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd-2/ 15 Signs you're Burnt Out, Not Lazy
• Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd-2/ 15 Toxic Things Parents Say to their Children
• Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd-2/ 15 Red Flags Early in a Relationship

Leave a Comment Cancel Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

The Tech Edvocate

• Advertisement
• Home Page Five (No Sidebar)
• Home Page Four
• Home Page Three
• Home Page Two
• Icons [No Sidebar]
• Left Sidbear Page
• Lynch Educational Consulting
• My Speaking Page
• Newsletter Sign Up Confirmation
• Newsletter Unsubscription
• Page Example
• Privacy Policy
• Protected Content
• Request a Product Review
• Shortcodes Examples
• Terms and Conditions
• The Edvocate
• The Tech Edvocate Product Guide
• Write For Us
• Dr. Lynch’s Personal Website
• The Edvocate Podcast
• Assistive Technology
• Child Development Tech
• Early Childhood & K-12 EdTech
• EdTech Futures
• EdTech News
• EdTech Policy & Reform
• EdTech Startups & Businesses
• Higher Education EdTech
• Online Learning & eLearning
• Parent & Family Tech
• Personalized Learning
• Product Reviews
• Tech Edvocate Awards
• School Ratings

Zelenskyy said Ukraine told no one about the Kursk invasion because its allies would have called it ‘unrealistic’

Joe biden delivers lengthy farewell at convention: ‘america, i gave my best to you’, today’s nyt mini crossword answers for aug. 20, 6th-generation waymo driver, sources: apple plans to make iphone 16 pro and pro max in india for the first time as foxconn rushes to produce the high-end models closer to the global debut (sankalp phartiyal/bloomberg), today’s wordle hints (and answer) for tuesday, august 20, 2024, the trump and harris campaigns are taking different approaches to courting this powerful voting bloc, when nothing ever goes out of print: maintaining backlist ebooks (2016), republicans ask the supreme court to disenfranchise thousands of swing state voters, the acolyte has been canceled, 13 ways to critique a speech.

Introduction:

Public speaking is an essential skill that can be honed and improved through practice, feedback, and constructive criticism. This article aims to provide you with 13 effective ways to critique a speech, so you can help others sharpen their public speaking capabilities.

1. Analyze The Structure

Examine the beginning, middle, and end of the speaker’s speech. Well-structured speeches should have a catchy introduction, logical flow of ideas, and a strong conclusion.

2. Focus on Delivery

Take note of body language, posture, eye contact, and gesture usage. A successful speech must have clear pronunciation, proper tone variation, pauses where needed, and suitable facial expressions.

3. Gauge Audience Engagement

Observe the audience’s reaction during the speech. Note if they appear interested or not. A good speech captivates its audience.

4. Evaluate Vocal Variety

Assess whether the speaker uses different pitch levels, pausing techniques, and rhythm patterns that make content engaging to listen to.

5. Check for Clarity & Brevity

A good speech must convey its message clearly without being overly complicated or too long.

6. Examine Visual Aids

Review the visual aids used in the presentation and their effectiveness in conveying information and supporting key points.

7. Identify Purpose & Goals

Determine if the speaker effectively conveyed the purpose of their speech and achieved their desired outcome.

8. Evaluate Use of Humor

Note if humor was used appropriately and contributed positively to the overall presentation.

9. Consider Emotional Appeal

Assess whether the speech effectively connected on an emotional level with the audience through storytelling or emotive language that supports key messages.

10. Reflect on Facts & Data Used

Examine how well facts were used and how they supported main points while checking for accuracy and sources of information presented.

11. Suggest Improvement Areas

Identify any weak points in the speaker’s speech that could be improved, such as content organization, language used, visual aids, or delivery techniques.

12. Highlight Strengths

Ensure you point out strengths in the speaker’s performance to encourage and reinforce good habits.

13. Provide Constructive Feedback

Share your observations with the speaker in an empathetic manner and offer specific suggestions on how they can improve while acknowledging their effort and achievements.

Conclusion:

By examining these 13 areas of critique when evaluating someone’s speech, you will be able to provide valuable insights and suggestions for improvement. Remember that effective critiques are constructive and aim to help the speaker become better at public speaking by learning from experience.

5 Ways to Be Good at Volleyball

4 ways to be drug-free.

Matthew Lynch

Related articles more from author.

4 Ways to Use an Exercise Ball for Beginners

3 Ways to Be a Good Guitar Player

3 Ways to Overcome Fear of Making New Friends

7 Ways to Spend One’s Holidays Without Getting Bored

12 Simple Ways to Be a Nicer Person to Your Spouse

How to Help a Blind Person

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, generate accurate citations for free.

• Knowledge Base
• How to write a rhetorical analysis | Key concepts & examples

How to Write a Rhetorical Analysis | Key Concepts & Examples

Published on August 28, 2020 by Jack Caulfield . Revised on July 23, 2023.

A rhetorical analysis is a type of essay  that looks at a text in terms of rhetoric. This means it is less concerned with what the author is saying than with how they say it: their goals, techniques, and appeals to the audience.

Instantly correct all language mistakes in your text

Upload your document to correct all your mistakes in minutes

Table of contents

Key concepts in rhetoric, analyzing the text, introducing your rhetorical analysis, the body: doing the analysis, concluding a rhetorical analysis, other interesting articles, frequently asked questions about rhetorical analysis.

Rhetoric, the art of effective speaking and writing, is a subject that trains you to look at texts, arguments and speeches in terms of how they are designed to persuade the audience. This section introduces a few of the key concepts of this field.

Appeals: Logos, ethos, pathos

Appeals are how the author convinces their audience. Three central appeals are discussed in rhetoric, established by the philosopher Aristotle and sometimes called the rhetorical triangle: logos, ethos, and pathos.

Logos , or the logical appeal, refers to the use of reasoned argument to persuade. This is the dominant approach in academic writing , where arguments are built up using reasoning and evidence.

Ethos , or the ethical appeal, involves the author presenting themselves as an authority on their subject. For example, someone making a moral argument might highlight their own morally admirable behavior; someone speaking about a technical subject might present themselves as an expert by mentioning their qualifications.

Pathos , or the pathetic appeal, evokes the audience’s emotions. This might involve speaking in a passionate way, employing vivid imagery, or trying to provoke anger, sympathy, or any other emotional response in the audience.

These three appeals are all treated as integral parts of rhetoric, and a given author may combine all three of them to convince their audience.

Text and context

In rhetoric, a text is not necessarily a piece of writing (though it may be this). A text is whatever piece of communication you are analyzing. This could be, for example, a speech, an advertisement, or a satirical image.

In these cases, your analysis would focus on more than just language—you might look at visual or sonic elements of the text too.

The context is everything surrounding the text: Who is the author (or speaker, designer, etc.)? Who is their (intended or actual) audience? When and where was the text produced, and for what purpose?

Looking at the context can help to inform your rhetorical analysis. For example, Martin Luther King, Jr.’s “I Have a Dream” speech has universal power, but the context of the civil rights movement is an important part of understanding why.

Claims, supports, and warrants

A piece of rhetoric is always making some sort of argument, whether it’s a very clearly defined and logical one (e.g. in a philosophy essay) or one that the reader has to infer (e.g. in a satirical article). These arguments are built up with claims, supports, and warrants.

A claim is the fact or idea the author wants to convince the reader of. An argument might center on a single claim, or be built up out of many. Claims are usually explicitly stated, but they may also just be implied in some kinds of text.

The author uses supports to back up each claim they make. These might range from hard evidence to emotional appeals—anything that is used to convince the reader to accept a claim.

The warrant is the logic or assumption that connects a support with a claim. Outside of quite formal argumentation, the warrant is often unstated—the author assumes their audience will understand the connection without it. But that doesn’t mean you can’t still explore the implicit warrant in these cases.

For example, look at the following statement:

We can see a claim and a support here, but the warrant is implicit. Here, the warrant is the assumption that more likeable candidates would have inspired greater turnout. We might be more or less convinced by the argument depending on whether we think this is a fair assumption.

Receive feedback on language, structure, and formatting

Professional editors proofread and edit your paper by focusing on:

• Academic style
• Vague sentences
• Style consistency

See an example

Rhetorical analysis isn’t a matter of choosing concepts in advance and applying them to a text. Instead, it starts with looking at the text in detail and asking the appropriate questions about how it works:

• What is the author’s purpose?
• Do they focus closely on their key claims, or do they discuss various topics?
• What tone do they take—angry or sympathetic? Personal or authoritative? Formal or informal?
• Who seems to be the intended audience? Is this audience likely to be successfully reached and convinced?
• What kinds of evidence are presented?

By asking these questions, you’ll discover the various rhetorical devices the text uses. Don’t feel that you have to cram in every rhetorical term you know—focus on those that are most important to the text.

The following sections show how to write the different parts of a rhetorical analysis.

Like all essays, a rhetorical analysis begins with an introduction . The introduction tells readers what text you’ll be discussing, provides relevant background information, and presents your thesis statement .

Hover over different parts of the example below to see how an introduction works.

Martin Luther King, Jr.’s “I Have a Dream” speech is widely regarded as one of the most important pieces of oratory in American history. Delivered in 1963 to thousands of civil rights activists outside the Lincoln Memorial in Washington, D.C., the speech has come to symbolize the spirit of the civil rights movement and even to function as a major part of the American national myth. This rhetorical analysis argues that King’s assumption of the prophetic voice, amplified by the historic size of his audience, creates a powerful sense of ethos that has retained its inspirational power over the years.

The body of your rhetorical analysis is where you’ll tackle the text directly. It’s often divided into three paragraphs, although it may be more in a longer essay.

Each paragraph should focus on a different element of the text, and they should all contribute to your overall argument for your thesis statement.

Hover over the example to explore how a typical body paragraph is constructed.

King’s speech is infused with prophetic language throughout. Even before the famous “dream” part of the speech, King’s language consistently strikes a prophetic tone. He refers to the Lincoln Memorial as a “hallowed spot” and speaks of rising “from the dark and desolate valley of segregation” to “make justice a reality for all of God’s children.” The assumption of this prophetic voice constitutes the text’s strongest ethical appeal; after linking himself with political figures like Lincoln and the Founding Fathers, King’s ethos adopts a distinctly religious tone, recalling Biblical prophets and preachers of change from across history. This adds significant force to his words; standing before an audience of hundreds of thousands, he states not just what the future should be, but what it will be: “The whirlwinds of revolt will continue to shake the foundations of our nation until the bright day of justice emerges.” This warning is almost apocalyptic in tone, though it concludes with the positive image of the “bright day of justice.” The power of King’s rhetoric thus stems not only from the pathos of his vision of a brighter future, but from the ethos of the prophetic voice he adopts in expressing this vision.

Prevent plagiarism. Run a free check.

The conclusion of a rhetorical analysis wraps up the essay by restating the main argument and showing how it has been developed by your analysis. It may also try to link the text, and your analysis of it, with broader concerns.

Explore the example below to get a sense of the conclusion.

It is clear from this analysis that the effectiveness of King’s rhetoric stems less from the pathetic appeal of his utopian “dream” than it does from the ethos he carefully constructs to give force to his statements. By framing contemporary upheavals as part of a prophecy whose fulfillment will result in the better future he imagines, King ensures not only the effectiveness of his words in the moment but their continuing resonance today. Even if we have not yet achieved King’s dream, we cannot deny the role his words played in setting us on the path toward it.

If you want to know more about AI tools , college essays , or fallacies make sure to check out some of our other articles with explanations and examples or go directly to our tools!

• Ad hominem fallacy
• Post hoc fallacy
• Appeal to authority fallacy
• False cause fallacy
• Sunk cost fallacy

College essays

• Choosing Essay Topic
• Write a College Essay
• Write a Diversity Essay
• College Essay Format & Structure
• Comparing and Contrasting in an Essay

 (AI) Tools

• Grammar Checker
• Paraphrasing Tool
• Text Summarizer
• AI Detector
• Plagiarism Checker
• Citation Generator

The goal of a rhetorical analysis is to explain the effect a piece of writing or oratory has on its audience, how successful it is, and the devices and appeals it uses to achieve its goals.

Unlike a standard argumentative essay , it’s less about taking a position on the arguments presented, and more about exploring how they are constructed.

The term “text” in a rhetorical analysis essay refers to whatever object you’re analyzing. It’s frequently a piece of writing or a speech, but it doesn’t have to be. For example, you could also treat an advertisement or political cartoon as a text.

Logos appeals to the audience’s reason, building up logical arguments . Ethos appeals to the speaker’s status or authority, making the audience more likely to trust them. Pathos appeals to the emotions, trying to make the audience feel angry or sympathetic, for example.

Collectively, these three appeals are sometimes called the rhetorical triangle . They are central to rhetorical analysis , though a piece of rhetoric might not necessarily use all of them.

In rhetorical analysis , a claim is something the author wants the audience to believe. A support is the evidence or appeal they use to convince the reader to believe the claim. A warrant is the (often implicit) assumption that links the support with the claim.

Cite this Scribbr article

If you want to cite this source, you can copy and paste the citation or click the “Cite this Scribbr article” button to automatically add the citation to our free Citation Generator.

Caulfield, J. (2023, July 23). How to Write a Rhetorical Analysis | Key Concepts & Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved August 19, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/academic-essay/rhetorical-analysis/

Is this article helpful?

Jack Caulfield

Other students also liked, how to write an argumentative essay | examples & tips, how to write a literary analysis essay | a step-by-step guide, comparing and contrasting in an essay | tips & examples, get unlimited documents corrected.

✔ Free APA citation check included ✔ Unlimited document corrections ✔ Specialized in correcting academic texts

• Terms of Use
• Privacy Policy
• Internet Cookies
• Instructional Exchange
• Educator's Toolkit
• Ayers Exclusives
• Tennessee Tools
• Education Events
• Conference Materials
• Crosswalk Charts
• Podcast Resources
• Webinar Sessions

Speech Critique Examples

How to Write a Critical Analysis of a Speech

How to Set Up a Rhetorical Analysis

Whether you’re a student or a seasoned professional, the ability to critically analyze a speech is an essential skill for speakers. Understanding the components of a speech and what makes those components successful can help you deliver a speech that your audience finds engaging and enlightening.

Understanding the Different Types of Speeches

When critiquing a speech, you first need to understand the objective of the speech. There are three primary types of speeches: to inform, to persuade or to entertain. Informative speeches are typically rooted in facts and statistics or focus on “how-to” topics. For instance, many TED Talks are informative speeches.

Persuasive speeches also use facts and statistics but use that information to convince an audience to change their behavior or take a certain action. Finally, speeches that are meant to entertain are often those delivered at weddings or social gatherings. They’re often funny or self-deprecating and are populated with anecdotes.

Know Your Audience

Another critical aspect of speech analysis is understanding the audience. Is this a formal setting where your audience expects a serious, informative tone? Is the audience a group of people who are impassioned about a particular subject and could be hostile if you’re trying to change their minds? Is your audience an informal gathering of people who expect a light-hearted or amusing delivery?

You wouldn’t have a person with no sense of humor host a convention for comedians. Likewise, you wouldn’t have a comedian lead a convention for physicians who are discussing breakthroughs in cancer research. Knowing your audience can mean the difference between a successful speech and one that fails.

Know What You’re Analyzing

Once you know the objective of the speech, you’ll need to know what to analyze. In "Rhetoric," ancient Greek philosopher Aristotle wrote that all great speeches share three pillars of rhetoric: logos, pathos and ethos.

While typically applied to persuasive speeches, these three elements are critical for any speech. Logos is the meaning, the reasoning and the logical evidence the speaker uses. Pathos is the words, phrases and personal stories a speaker uses to elicit emotion, and ethos is the credibility and trustworthiness of the speaker. In other words, does the speaker have expertise in this particular subject?

Evaluating a Speech

Critical speech analysis should revolve around the three pillars. As you analyze, you’ll need to determine whether the speech maker is using enough facts and logical evidence to establish credibility.

For instance, if a speaker is delivering information on protecting the environment, is he using credibly sourced facts to support his statements, or is he speaking in generalities? Is he using words, phrases and personal anecdotes that elicit emotion from the audience, or is he using vague words that have no emotional impact?

Finally, through education or background, is the speaker qualified to be speaking on this particular subject? Is she passionate about the subject, or is she coming across as a boring, monotone speaker? Is she using appropriate gestures and body language? Is her voice clear and loud enough to be heard? Finally, is her tone appropriate for the audience?

Use a Speech Analysis Rubric

A rubric can be an effective tool to help you analyze a speech, as it can help you assign a numeric value to each specific component of a speech. If you’re analyzing a speech for a classroom assignment, you’ll likely be given a rubric from which to work. If not, you can easily find one online by searching for “critical speech analysis rubric.”

Many readily available rubrics focus on aspects of Aristotle’s rhetoric by addressing a speech’s structure, format, research, delivery and style and will help you determine whether the speech was appropriate for its particular audience and met its overarching goals.

How to Write an Analysis of a Speech

If you’re working on the critical analysis of a speech for a class assignment, you’ll likely need to complete a written assignment to accompany your assessment. As with any other essay, a written analysis of a speech should include a strong introduction and clear thesis statement, several body paragraphs with topic sentences and strong transitions that clearly support your analysis and an effective conclusion that summarizes your critique.

Be sure that the essay is free of grammar and spelling mistakes and typos. As with any piece of writing, it’s always helpful to have another person review it before you publish it or submit it for a grade.

Related Articles

How to Write a Speech Essay

How to Write About Irony in a Literary Essay

Help to Do a Rhetorical Analysis Essay

How to Write a Speech Proposal

What Are the Causes of Communication Failure?

Speech Vs. Essay

How to Determine the Tone of an Essay

How to Establish Credibility in an Informative Speech

• Brigham Young University: Basic Questions for Rhetorical Analysis

Jennifer Brozak earned her state teaching certificate in Secondary English and Communications from St. Vincent College in Latrobe, Pa., and her bachelor's degree in journalism from the University of Pittsburgh. A former high school English teacher, Jennifer enjoys writing articles about parenting and education and has contributed to Reader's Digest, Mamapedia, Shmoop and more.

Definition of Critique

Examples of critique in literature, example #1: the guardian (by philip hope-wallace), example #2: the washington post (by the washington post), example #3: hamlet: poem unlimited (by harold bloom), example #4: the daily telegraph (by victoria lambert), function of critique, post navigation.

How To Give Constructive Criticism: 6 Helpful Tips

• by Celes     |    
• Career & Work , Relationships

This article is available for download as an ebook. Click on the button below to download.

“People seldom refuse help, if one offers it in the right way.” — A. C. Benson.

Have you ever given suggestions that were subsequently ignored?

Have you ever given critiques that were not well received?

Have you ever wanted to give constructive criticism on something, but held back from doing so because you did not know how to convey your ideas across?

How to Give Constructive Criticism in 6 Steps

Today’s guide is on how to give constructive criticism to someone. Whether at work or in relationships, sharing and receiving feedback is part and parcel of improvement. If you have ideas on how someone can improve, don’t hold your ideas back — rather, share your criticism constructively.

Of course, to be sensitive to others’ feelings and offer feedback when you feel the other person is ready to take it. Otherwise, you may come across as imposing your views on others, especially if you repeatedly tell others what to do without them asking for your opinion.

1. Use the Feedback Sandwich

The feedback sandwich method is a popular method of giving constructive criticism. It is often used in Toastmasters and in the corporate environment. I refer to the feedback sandwich as PIP, which stands for Positive-Improvement-Positive. I know there are people who use PIP to represent Praise-Improve-Praise which is different from my version of PIP. Read on.

With Positive-Improve-Positive , your feedback is broken down into 3 segments:

• You start off by focusing on the strengths — what you like about the item in question.
• Then, you provide the criticism — things you don’t like, the areas of improvement.
• Lastly, you round off the feedback with (a) a reiteration of the positive comments you gave at the start and (b) the positive results that can be expected if the criticism is acted upon.

It’s called the “feedback sandwich” because you wedge your criticism between an opening and an ending — like a patty wedged between two buns.

Here’s an example: you want to critique someone on their website. Here’s how PIP can be used:

• “Great website! I love the overall layout and how user-friendly it is. The overall design is nice and pleasing to the eye, and consistent with your brand. The menu is very accessible and makes it easy to access your site sections. I found the intro video helpful in giving me an overview of what you do.”
• “However, I thought that there are two things that can be better. Firstly, there is a lot of content in the sidebar that clutters up the usage experience. Perhaps if the sidebar content can be narrowed down to the key things, it would make it easier to navigate. Secondly, the font size is too small for me. I found it hard to read as I had to keep squinting.”
• “Overall, great work. I love what you’ve done with the design, layout, and intro video. I think if the sidebar clutter can be removed and the font size can be increased, it’d really create a fantastic usage experience for any visitor.”

The feedback sandwich is a good framework for providing constructive criticism because by starting off with the positive comments (the first “P”), you let the receiver know that you are on his/her side and you are not there to attack him/her . You are also recognizing things that the receiver is doing right, rather than only talking about the issue areas which can come across as being rude — especially if both of you don’t really know each other to begin with. The receiver then becomes more receptive to your critique (the “I” in PIP).

After sharing the things you don’t like or feel can be improved, round off the criticism with more positive points (the last “P”). This helps your critique end off on a high note, rather than leaving the recipient with a sour taste in his/her mouth. It also reminds him/her what he/she is doing right and reinforces the benefits of acting on your critique.

The feedback sandwich method is most appropriate when you are giving criticism to people you don’t know or don’t know well. Otherwise you may come across as very aggressive and rude if you just jump right into the critique. This is especially true in the Asian culture. Over time though, you can go right into the critique if you have established a rapport with the recipient and he/she is familiar with the way you think.

Some people may dislike using the feedback sandwich as they think it’s silly to praise for the sake of it. But the point of the feedback sandwich isn’t to give false praise or to butter people up. People are often quick to criticize, judge, or even shame , and it downplays what others are doing well and the effort they have put into their work. I see the feedback sandwich as a great way to (a) practice emotional generosity , because we sure can work on being more generous in supporting people’s hard work, (b) help the person learn what he/she is doing well, and (c) use this as the foundation to share what can be improved on.

2. Focus on the situation, not the person

(Image: Pink Sherbet )

Constructive criticism focuses on the situation, not the person.

Example #1 : Giving feedback on a person’s presentation style

• Bad example : “You’re really boring. You kept going on and on about a certain point even though we were running behind time; it made me want to fall asleep!”  — While perhaps said with good intentions to help the person improve (though overly critical here , ouch ), this is not exactly constructive criticism. It makes a personal attack and makes it seem like he/she is the problem.
• Good example : [Apply the feedback sandwich first where you insert context and talk about the good points. Then, move on to the critique.] “… however, I thought some of the points could be delivered in a more concise manner. For example, the presentation allotted time is 30 minutes but we went over time by about 10 minutes, which is one-third of the intended time. Since there were 5 points, perhaps we could allocate 5 minutes per point, which would take up 25 minutes for 5 points, and then have 5 minutes left for closing? This would create a presentation that’s more well-paced.” — The situation is detached from the person. Critique is given on the situation itself.

Example #2 : Giving feedback on a person’s character trait

• Bad example : “You’re always so negative. It’s so draining to be around you.”  — Like Example #1, this feedback makes a personal attack at the person. It also does not tell the person what he/she can do, which makes it unconstructive.
• Good feedback : [Insert context first before going into critique.] “… there are times when I was hurt by the comments you made as they were somewhat demeaning. For example, the last time I had a haircut, one of the first things you said was how ugly I looked. That took me by surprise and I felt quite down.”  — While it’s tricky to give constructive criticism when it comes to someone’s personality, here it is successfully accomplished by separating the person’s actions from him/herself. This makes it easy to critique the behavior without offending the person in question.

How to apply this tip:

• Firstly, detach the situation from the person . This distinction is crucial. Take the person out of the equation and focus on the behavior / action / situation / issue at hand.
• Comment on the issue, not the person . For example, “The clothes are dirty” and not “You are dirty.” “The report is late” and not “You are late.” “The food is oily” and not “You are a bad cook.”
• Don’t make personal attacks . Comments like “I’m so sick and tired of…” or “You’re so stupid / negative / lazy / unorganized / ” come across as accusatory.  Stay away from attacks.
• Don’t use active voice; use passive voice . Example of active voice vs. passive voice: “You gave a bad presentation.” vs. “The presentation you gave was bad.” Notice that the passive voice shifts the attention away from the person and brings it to the subject matter.
• Share how it affects you.  Rather than go on and on about how bad the thing is, share how it affects you. This shifts the focus away from the person and onto yourself, which lets the person take a step back to evaluate the situation. It also gives him/her insight to where you are coming from.

3. Be specific with your feedback

(Image: Joe Duty )

The third tip to providing constructive criticism is to be specific.

I receive a lot of feedback in running PE. The more specific someone is when giving the feedback, the more actionable it is for me. Here is an example of a vague vs. specific feedback:

• Vague : “Hey Celes, I’d love it if you can write some articles on communication.”
• Specific :  “Hey Celes, don’t know if you’re taking suggestions but if you do, I’d love some advice on public speaking.”

The first feedback is very broad — “communication” is a very general topic. While I can identify some subtopics under communication like “networking,” “ body language ,” “ small talk ,” and “public speaking,” the subtopics that I choose may not be what the reader really wants.

With the second feedback, it is more actionable because it is so specific. It tells me right away that “Hey, there’s a request for public speaking articles,” after which I can then plan for an article or series on public speaking. There is no confusion.

That’s not to say that vague feedback is stupid or bad. It’s just that specific feedback helps me understand the user’s needs more easily, which makes it easy for me to serve his/her request. Likewise, it’s the same for you — if you want very actionable outcomes, if you want people to help you in a more targeted way, give specific vs. vague feedback. Specific feedback that doesn’t target the person as I shared in tip #2.

Here is another example of vague vs. specific feedback. Say you’re giving feedback on a report:

• Vague : “Good effort on the report but I don’t like it. I think there is room to be better.” — This feedback is hardly constructive. What do you mean by “don’t like it”? “Like” and “dislike” are subjective words. Unless objective criteria is used, it’s hard for the person to decipher what is the problem.
• Specific : “Good effort but there are some things which can be improved – namely, (a) the formatting and (b) the report conclusions. The formatting is not standardized – there are some parts that uses Arial and other parts that use Times New Roman. In a formal report, it is best to standardize the font. For the report conclusions, the ideas are good but they are too brief, especially ideas #1 and #3. The management would need more data to make their assessment.” — Great feedback that is specific. It tells the receiver the key problem areas, why they are problem areas, and specific incidences where they appear.

Here’s how to make your feedback specific and hence actionable:

• Focus more on objective points than subjective opinions. Just saying “I don’t like it” is not helpful. On the other hand, stating the specific things you do not like, is helpful.
• Break your feedback down into key points . Don’t give your feedback as one big lump. Break it down into various key points, then give your feedback point by point.
• Give specific examples of each point . What are the exact situations or examples where the person exhibits the behaviors you highlighted in #2? Point them out. There is no need to highlight every single example – just pointing out 1-2 key examples per point will be sufficient. The intention here is to (a) bring the person’s awareness to things which he/she may be oblivious about and (b) illustrate what you mean.

4. Comment on things that are actionable

The whole point of giving feedback is to help the person improve.

Hence, focus on the things that the person  can  do something about, rather than the things that are out of his/her control. Critiquing the former makes your criticism constructive; critiquing the latter just makes the person feel bad because he/she can’t do anything about these things even if he/she wants to. You can comment on latter if it is crucial, but be sure to bring the focus back onto the things that he/she  can  control.

Let’s look at an example. Say your friend is in a singing competition and she has entered the finals. She asks you to critique her performance. Here, actionable critique would be talking about her overall performance, her pitch, her body language, and perhaps even her song choice.

On the other hand, talking about how her voice is too husky probably isn’t very helpful because firstly, if she can get into the finals, it probably isn’t a real “issue” to begin with. Secondly, it’s not something she can change. Thirdly, such a feedback is highly subjective. There are people who like husky voices just as there are others who prefer other kinds of voices. While you can point out things that you don’t like (e.g. if you find her voice too husky), making it central to your critique probably isn’t very helpful for her.

In another example, say your friend just started a new restaurant. He has signed a rental lease for 12 months and the location has average foot traffic. He approaches you for advice to market his restaurant.

Saying things like “change your restaurant location” isn’t helpful because the lease has been signed. You should point out the problem with the restaurant location and recommend that he consider places with high foot traffic if it’s possible to change the location, but focusing 100% of your energy to bash his poor location choice isn’t really going to help.

On the other hand, suggesting ideas that can counteract or mitigate the average foot traffic will be helpful. Actionable ideas include to invite food bloggers for food tasting, to do a media launch, to give promotional discounts, to create a buzz-worthy event to get people to visit the restaurant, and to place advertisements in lifestyle magazines.

Knowing what’s actionable and unactionable requires you to be empathetic. Understand the person’s situation and his/her objectives, then provide your critique based on that.

5. Give recommendations on how to improve

When all is said and done, give recommendations on what the person can do to improve.

Firstly, your recommendations will tie up your critique in a nice bow. Everyone has varying perspectives, which means every critique can be interpreted in different ways. Giving recommendations will give the person a clear idea of what you have in mind. Secondly, recommendations provide a strong call-to-action. You want the person to act on what you have shared, not procrastinate.

With your recommendations, I recommend to (a) be specific with your suggestions and (b) briefly explain the rationale behind the recommendation.

Example : Giving feedback on a presentation

• Weak recommendation : “The presentation is too long. Make it shorter.”  — Not very helpful. Reducing the presentation time can be done via many ways — cutting down the points, removing examples, talking faster, and so on. What exactly do you mean? Part of giving constructive criticism includes being specific (see Tip #3).
• Good recommendation : “Instead of 2-3 examples per point which detracts from the main message, limit 1 example to each point. This way, the presentation is more succinct and impactful. Doing this, the presentation length will easily be reduced from 30 minutes to 20 minutes.” — Great recommendation that is specific. Rationale is also provided which explains your point of view to the person.

6. Don’t make assumptions

My final tip for giving constructive criticism is not to make assumptions. When providing criticism, do so within what you know as fact about the person and the subject. There’s no need to make any assumptions. Not only does it make the person look bad, it also makes you look bad — especially when your assumption is wrong.

Here are 3 examples to highlight the difference between an assumption and a critique/comment:

Example #1 on public speaking:

• Criticism:  “The speech was mediocre. The speaker appeared nervous and was not able to lead the audience.”
• Assumption:  “The speaker never had any public speaking experience.”  This is an assumption and is not necessarily true. Seasoned public speakers can be nervous when giving speeches, especially in an new environment. To assume that someone doesn’t have any public speaking experience just because he/she appears nervous is quite pompous.

Example #2 on accents:

• Observation: “This person speaks with an accent that I’m not familiar with.”
• Assumption:  “This person is not a native English speaker.”  Not necessary true. Just because you don’t recognize the accent or you can’t understand it as well doesn’t mean that English isn’t the person’s native language — it just means that you aren’t familiar with the accent. In my experience, I find that people who are less traveled tend to think that anyone who doesn’t speak with an American accent is not a native English speaker, when there are many developed countries where English  is  their first language and the citizens are bilingual or trilingual.

Example #3  on someone’s behavior:

• Observation: “The new colleague seems to be  anxious  when around male co-workers. She keeps fidgeting and she’s not able to articulate herself well.”
• Assumption:  “The person was brought up in an all-girls environment.”  Assumption. This is not necessarily true. Anxiety around the opposite gender can happen to anyone.

As they say, when you assume, you make an “ASS out of U and ME.” Not having a presumptuous attitude will go a long way in any communication, not just in giving criticism.

Further Reading

• 5 Tips To Deal With Negative Criticism [Video]
• How To Deal With Critical People: 8 Tips
• 8 Tips To Tackle Naysayers
• How To Be Assertive, Not Aggressive [Podcast]
• Be a Better Me in 30 Days,  Day 14: Get Feedback from Others
• Be a Better Me in 30 Days,  Day 15: Reflect on a Criticism

Get the manifesto version of this article:  The Constructive Criticism Manifesto

Hi! I’m Celes. Thanks for reading. Personal Excellence is where I write about how to live our best life as we tackle life’s challenges. About Me »

• How To Deal With Disillusionment
• How To Deal With Uncertainty
• How To Overcome Anger
• How To Say No To Others
• How To Tackle Naysayers
• How To Stop Analysis Paralysis
• How To Deal With Critical People
• How To Handle Negative Criticism
• How To Give Constructive Criticism
• How To Deal With Unsupportive Friends & Family
• How To Improve Your Relationship With Your Parents
• How To Find Your Life Purpose
• How To Find Purpose After a Hard Fall in Life
• How To Move On From a Heartbreak
• How To Find Your Soulmate
• How To Stop Procrastinating
• How To Make Life’s Hardest Decisions
• How To Stay Focused & Not Get Distracted
• 101 Ways To Live Your Best Life
• 101 Ways To Be a Better Person
• 101 Things To Do Before You Die
• 101 Questions To Ask Yourself

My Date Coaching Series, Part 1

How Do I Encourage My Friends and Family to Grow?

Lessons From a Poor Service Encounter (And 10 Elements of Great Customer Service)

Can Everyone Be Successful in Starting Their Business?

Online Negativity: How To Create a Better Internet For Everyone

How Long Would You Spend Helping Your Baby Learn To Walk?

Copyright 2024 © Personal Excellence  |   Terms of Use   |   Privacy

Practical tips to tackle life’s challenges. Join my email list.

Home > Blog > Rhetorical Analysis Essay Examples and Best Practices

Rhetorical Analysis Essay Examples and Best Practices

• Smodin Editorial Team
• Updated: August 13, 2024
• General Guide About Content and Writing

Are you having trouble creating a high-quality rhetorical analysis essay? Then you’ll love the rhetorical analysis essay examples and best practices in this article. We’ll share the best ways to improve the quality of your content and get top marks with your assignment.

Let’s dive in!

What Is a Rhetorical Analysis Essay: Examples and Key Elements

A rhetorical analysis essay examines how authors or speakers use rhetoric to persuade, inform, or entertain their audience. It is not a persuasive essay . It involves breaking down a piece of communication, such as a speech, article, or advertisement. This helps you to understand the strategies employed to achieve its purpose.

Still want more details about what is a rhetorical analysis essay? No problem! The essay typically focuses on three primary elements, which are as follows:

• Ethos: Ethos refers to the credibility and character of the speaker or writer. You can use it to establish trust and authority. It helps convince the audience of the speaker’s reliability and expertise on the subject. Furthermore, you can convey ethos through the speaker’s qualifications, reputation, ethical behavior, and the use of credible sources.
• Pathos: Pathos appeals to the audience’s emotions. It aims to evoke feelings that will lead the audience to accept the speaker’s viewpoint. You can achieve this through storytelling, vivid imagery, emotionally charged language, and personal anecdotes. Also, pathos is effective in creating a connection with the audience and making the argument more relatable and impactful.
• Logos: Logos is the appeal to logic and reason. It involves the use of evidence, facts, statistics, and logical arguments to support a claim. Therefore, you can add a rhetorical analysis body paragraph about the extent of evidence the author provides.

To write a rhetorical analysis essay, one must first identify the purpose and audience of the text. Next, analyze the rhetorical strategies the author decided to use. This includes considering how effectively they contribute to the overall message. Also, examine the use of language, tone, imagery, and structure.

An Example of a Rhetorical Analysis

Let’s take Martin Luther King Jr’s speech, “I have a dream” as our rhetorical analysis example. The speech masterfully uses rhetorical strategies to inspire action for civil rights. Martin Luther King Jr establishes his credibility (ethos) by aligning with historical figures and documents, which enhances his moral authority.

Furthermore, he evokes strong emotions (pathos) through vivid imagery and the repetitive phrase “I have a dream.” This creates a hopeful vision for the future. Additionally, he employs logical arguments (logos) by highlighting broken promises and referencing American ideals of liberty and equality.

This blend of ethos, pathos, and logos makes his speech a powerful, and a call for justice and equality.

How to Write a Rhetorical Analysis Essay: Best Practices and Top Tips

Now, let’s look at some of the key rhetorical concepts to create an essay that will get you top marks. The idea is to use these best practices to save time and simplify the writing process. Also, they ensure you don’t miss out on important points that deliver on what you shared in the thesis statement.

So, consider the following if you want to know how to write a rhetorical analysis essay and what to include in each section of your essay.

Understand the Text

Thoroughly read and understand the text before you begin the analysis stage. After all, how can you create a rhetorical essay on a piece of literature you don’t fully understand? You may feel like saving time by skimming the content, but it will lead to an inaccurate and slower writing process.

You’ll need to identify the author’s purpose, audience, and the main argument. Additionally, take notes on key points, recurring themes, and the overall tone. Understanding the context in which the text was created is crucial for an accurate analysis. Hence, pay attention to the historical, cultural, and social factors.

Identify Rhetorical Strategies

Focus on the three primary rhetorical appeals, which are ethos, pathos, and logos. Make sure to analyze how the author uses these strategies to persuade the audience. Then look for specific examples, such as language choices, emotional anecdotes, or logical arguments that illustrate these techniques.

Organize Your Essay

Create a clear rhetorical analysis essay outline that includes an introduction, body paragraphs, and conclusion format . The rhetorical analysis introduction should present the text being analyzed and your thesis statement. Also, each body paragraph should focus on a specific rhetorical strategy or element by providing evidence and analysis.

You’ll need to create a rhetorical analysis conclusion by summarizing your main points and restating the significance of your analysis. Make sure you summarize the main points in a way that is easy to understand. Also, leave the reader with a few final thoughts you want them to take away from the academic writing.

Use Textual Evidence

Support your analysis with direct quotes and detailed examples from the text. When citing evidence, explain how it illustrates the rhetorical strategy being discussed and its effect on the audience. Additionally, ensure that each piece of evidence is relevant and strengthens your overall argument.

However, don’t add too many direct quotes since it can clutter the flow and feel of the essay. Instead, select a few quotes that allow you to convey the key concepts of the literature piece. Generally, it’s a good idea to focus on a few key concepts rather than covering many in a shallow fashion.

Proofread and Revise

Carefully proofread your essay for grammatical and structural errors. Also, ensure that your analysis is coherent and logically organized. Revising allows you to refine your arguments, improve clarity, and ensure that your essay effectively communicates your analysis.

Furthermore, you may want to use tools that help you proofread and write a good rhetorical analysis essay. They can help you with aspects of the writing process, such as creating a clear thesis statement and logical reasoning.

Contextual Analysis

You can place the text within its broader context. This means discussing the historical, cultural, or social background that influences the text. Also, understanding the context can provide deeper insights into the rhetorical choices made by the author and how they resonate with the audience.

Maintain an Analytical Tone

Write in an objective and analytical tone for the best results. Avoid summarizing the text and instead focus on analyzing how the rhetorical strategies contribute to the author’s purpose. You’ll need to be critical and insightful, which shows a deep understanding of the text’s rhetorical techniques and their impact.

Are you unsure of how to strike the right analytical tone? Then it’s a good idea to look at different examples to learn the best practices. For example, you can look at a rhetorical analysis introduction example to get going.

How To Start a Rhetorical Analysis Essay: Examples To Help You

Do you want to know how to start a rhetorical analysis essay? We’ll now cover the basics of how you can start to get the best results. This ensures that you hit the ground running and finish the project in time for the deadline.

Here’s the step-by-step process about how to start a rhetorical analysis essay with an example to show you how it’s done:

• Understand the purpose: The goal of a rhetorical analysis essay is to examine how an author or speaker uses rhetoric to persuade, inform, or entertain an audience. For example, in analyzing Martin Luther King Jr.’s “I have a dream” speech, you would explore how King used rhetorical strategies to advocate for civil rights and inspire action.
• Read and annotate the text: Carefully read the text you are analyzing. Also, annotate key passages and note examples of rhetorical devices such as ethos, pathos, logos, diction, syntax, and imagery. For instance, you might highlight King’s use of metaphors like “the manacles of segregation and the chains of discrimination.”
• Formulate a thesis statement: Develop a clear thesis that presents your main argument about how the text uses rhetoric. For example, Martin Luther King Jr. effectively uses ethos, pathos, and logos to inspire his audience to pursue racial equality.

How To Write a Rhetorical Analysis Essay: Factors To Consider

You may need to look at many different examples to craft the best essay for your assignment. This ensures that you can figure out what works to get top marks. However, you shouldn’t directly copy from the example you come across. Instead, use them for inspiration to write an essay with a great writing flow that’s unique.

Here are the top things to consider when looking at a rhetorical analysis essay:

• Thesis statement example: Pay attention to the thesis statement example to better understand the type of issues you may need to address. This allows you to craft your own statement, which makes for a good topic to tackle.
• Analytical depth: Evaluate the depth of analysis in explaining how rhetorical strategies contribute to the text’s purpose. That’s because a strong essay goes beyond surface-level observations to provide insightful commentary on the effectiveness of these strategies.
• Logical organization: Check for a clear and logical structure, with each paragraph focusing on a specific aspect of the analysis. The organization should help guide the reader through the argument in a coherent and systematic way. You can emulate this organizational structure to improve the readability of your own essay.
• Conclusive summary: Look for a strong conclusion that summarizes the main points and reiterates the significance of the analysis. Furthermore, the conclusion should tie together the essay’s arguments and reflect on the overall impact of the rhetorical strategies.

AP Lang Rhetorical Analysis Essay Example

To write an AP Lang rhetorical analysis essay, start by carefully reading the text and identifying the author’s purpose, audience, and main argument. You’ll need to begin your essay with an introduction that includes the title, author, and context of the text. Also, don’t forget about the clear thesis statement.

In the body paragraphs, focus on specific rhetorical strategies such as ethos, pathos, and logos. you’ll also need to focus on using ethos, pathos, and logos, which we covered above.

Maintain an objective and analytical tone throughout your essay. You can achieve this by organizing your paragraphs logically, with each focusing on a different strategy or element.

Finally, conclude by summarizing your main points and reiterating the significance of the rhetorical strategies in achieving the author’s purpose. Make sure to proofread your essay for clarity and coherence to ensure a polished final piece. If you are unsure of how to structure your essay, you can always check out AP Lang rhetorical analysis essay examples online .

Frequently Asked Questions

What should i include in a rhetorical analysis essay introduction.

The introduction to the rhetorical analysis essay should provide background information on the text. This includes the author, title, and context. Also, it should present the purpose of the rhetorical analysis and your thesis statement.

Make sure that the thesis briefly mentions the main rhetorical strategies you will discuss to guide the reader on what to expect in the essay body. You’ll get better at doing this with practice and keep it brief.

How do I analyze ethos in a rhetorical analysis essay?

To analyze ethos in a rhetorical analysis essay, you need to evaluate how the author establishes credibility and authority. Look for references to their qualifications, experience, or reputation. Additionally, consider the tone and language used to build trust and rapport with the audience.

Discuss how these elements contribute to the overall persuasiveness of the text, which means you’ll need to read it in detail. It’s handy to make notes with regard to ethos evaluation as you work on the project.

How do I analyze logos in a rhetorical analysis essay?

To analyze logos in a rhetorical analysis essay, focus on the logical structure and evidence presented in the text. Also, identify examples of facts, statistics, logical arguments, and reasoning used to support the author’s claims.

You’ll also need to evaluate the clarity and coherence of these arguments and how they contribute to the overall persuasiveness of the text. This latter part is more tricky and takes practice before you can get it right.

What are common mistakes to avoid when writing a rhetorical analysis essay?

Common mistakes to avoid when writing a rhetorical analysis essay include summarizing the text instead of analyzing it. This is not the point of the content, and you need to avoid doing this since it can result in a low grade.

Furthermore, you need to avoid neglecting to support claims with evidence and failing to address the effectiveness of rhetorical strategies. Also, avoid focusing too much on one type of appeal (ethos, pathos, or logos) to the detriment of others.

Can I use a first-person perspective in a rhetorical analysis essay?

While rhetorical analysis essays are typically written in the third person to maintain an objective tone, there are instances where a first-person perspective might be appropriate. However, it is essential to use it sparingly and ensure that the focus remains on the text and its rhetorical strategies.

You may want to look at a rhetorical analysis essay example that uses the first person to learn. You can use your findings to improve the quality of your essay and make sure you strike the right balance.

Use Smodin AI To Write Your Rhetorical Analysis Essay

The best practices in this article will help you create a high-quality rhetorical analysis essay. Therefore, you can get top marks in your class or improve on your personal best. You’ll see that there’s a method to the madness, such as following the right structure.

Now that you know how to write a rhetorical analysis essay, you can begin the process. Make sure that you remember the rules about ethos, logos, and pathos to write the best content. This will also help you craft the introduction, body paragraphs, and conclusion sections.

Do you still need help with your visual rhetorical analysis essay? Then you can use Smodin AI to improve the overall quality of your essay. The tool can proofread your work or help generate text that meets your exact requirements.

So what are you waiting for? Give Smodin AI a try today and craft top-quality essays!

• Speech Writing
• Delivery Techniques
• PowerPoint & Visuals
• Speaker Habits
• Speaker Resources

Speech Critiques

• Book Reviews
• Browse Articles
• ALL Articles
• Learn About Us
• About Six Minutes
• Meet Our Authors
• Write for Us
• Advertise With Us

Speech Preparation #9: Prepare Now for Your Next Speech

This article focuses on the sixth step: critiquing your speech so you can learn from your strengths and weaknesses . Thus, a self-critique is really the first step in preparation for your next speech.

• How to Prepare Your Presentation
• Select Your Speech Topic
• Plan Your Speech Outline
• Writing Your First Draft
• Editing Your Speech
• Add Speech Impact with Rhetorical Devices
• Staging, Gestures, and Vocal Variety
• Practicing Your Presentation
• Self-Critique: Preparation for Next Time
• Winning a Toastmasters Speech Contest

Why Critique Your Presentation Skills?

Great speakers realize that presentation skills are not easily mastered in one or two or ten speeches. Speaking skills are improved incrementally one speech at a time.

To realize these incremental improvements, it is essential to periodically review your skills . Some people prefer to do this review once a week or once a month; I recommend that you review your skills after every speech , especially if you are a novice speaker just dipping your toes into the public speaking pool.

Critiquing Your Own Speech

It only takes a few minutes to review a speech , and the best time to do it is the same day that you delivered it. Your delivery is still fresh in your mind, as is your preparation for the speech.

When critiquing your own speech, you can apply many of the same criteria that you would when critiquing someone else’s speech. You will find an extensive list of these criteria in a previous Six Minutes article about speech analysis .

Those criteria are a great start, but you can also ask yourself many other questions too.

• Overall, were you satisfied with your final speech? If not, why not?
• Did you achieve your objective ? Was your core message received by the audience?
• Were you confident during your delivery? Were you more nervous or less nervous than previous speeches?
• What audience feedback did you receive during or after delivery of the speech? What strengths were mentioned? What weaknesses were revealed?
• What did you think of your delivery ?
• Did you have any stumbles ? Were they caused by nervousness, or was there another cause?
• How long did you speak ? Was this shorter or longer than you had planned? If you were under time, this may be an indication that your speaking rate was a bit fast. If you were over time, this may be an indication that you should have cut more material.
• Did you try any new techniques, either in the preparation phase or in your delivery? If so, what did you think? What lessons can you extract?

Depending on the context of the speech , a few other questions include:

• Was your pre-speech audience analysis accurate ? If not, what did you learn about this audience that you could apply to the speech to make it better?
• If you led a Q&A session during the presentation, how did it go? From the types of questions asked, did it seem like your audience “got” the message?
• If you obtained an audio recording , what did you learn from listening to it? Was your voice clear throughout? Did you have any distracting habits? (e.g. um’s, ah’s, trailing off at the end of sentences)
• If you obtained a video recording , what did you learn from watching it? How was your posture and eye contact? Were your gestures varied and timed well? Did you have any distracting habits?

And, one final question:

• If you were going to deliver the same speech to the same audience, what would you do differently ?

Remember that the aim of the self-critique is not to beat yourself up over any slips or mistakes you might have made. Instead, the true aim is to celebrate your successes and look ahead to see how you can improve for your next speech.

Self-Critique Example — Face the Wind

Overall, I’m very happy with my 2007 contest speech Face the Wind . I won the club, area, and division contests, and presented on the “big stage” at the district conference.

Unfortunately, I didn’t achieve the goal I had set for myself — winning the District 21 Speech Contest. I felt that I could have won, but the field of ten contestants was very strong.

Here’s my self-assessment, aided by the fact that I have an excellent video of my performance!

Speech Self-Critique: Strengths

• I did my best. I honestly felt that I delivered the best possible speech that my skills allowed at that given time. As I was walking off the stage, I wanted to give someone a high-five because I knew the delivery was my best.
• Gestures and Staging. I felt my choreography was second to none . I received numerous compliments on this aspect of the speech. This made me quite happy because I had spent a great deal of time working on gestures and staging.
• I got laughter from the audience in most places where I was aiming for it.
• Several audience members suggested that I have the skill set to be a full-time motivational speaker .
• I had lots of fun through the whole process! I received such positive encouragement from so many people. The organizers of the district speech contest treated the contestants like royalty!

Speech Self-Critique: Weaknesses

• In the future , I should videotape my rehearsal sessions to see if I can pick up on this trait.
• In the future , I need to work on writing so I have better punchlines and punch words .
• In the future , I need to keep my voice strong even during “quiet” lines.
• In the future , I need to solicit more feedback specifically about the core message and what might be done to strengthen it. Perhaps I need to devote a little more time to speech writing, and less to delivery techniques.

A question for you, my esteemed readers … How could I have improved the speech?

Next in the Speech Preparation Series

The last article in the Speech Preparation Series examines Toastmasters Speech Contests and the preparation necessary to be successful.

Please share this...

This is one of many public speaking articles featured on Six Minutes . Subscribe to Six Minutes for free to receive future articles.

Image credit: Girl in Mirror by FreeImages.com/Alex Bramwell ( license )

Add a Comment Cancel reply

E-Mail (hidden)

Subscribe - It's Free!

Similar Articles You May Like...

• Speech Preparation #8: How to Practice Your Presentation
• Speech Analysis #1: How to Study and Critique a Speech
• Speech Analysis #2: The Art of Delivering Evaluations
• Speech Analysis #4: Evaluation Forms, Tools, and Resources
• Speech Critique: Jacqueline Novogratz (TED 2009)
• Speech Analysis #3: Modified Sandwich Technique for Evaluations

Find More Articles Tagged:

Great point to critique yourself and I’m constantly amazed at how many people don’t. Actually, I’m not – because in the relief of having finished and not dieing of fright during their presentation they are on such a high they just don’t think.

One way I’ve encouraged myself to do it is to put it on my checklist of things to do – which obviously covers the things before I go on stage but also includes the things to do afterwards: thank X, speak to the sound person, check my kit etc….

Simon: I like the idea of a post-presentation checklist. That may help to form the speech self-critique habit.

Two hopefully helpful critiques: First, while your gestures were overall really excellent–evocative and well delivered–there were a few that I felt were overdone. Gestures which hit the audience over the head a bit too much, as it were. Two that come to mind: when you went down on your knees in the tree story, that felt over-done and somewhat un-natural. And in the Maximus story when you made the baby-cradling gesture, it felt almost hyperbolic–we get that it’s an emotional story, and I don’t feel that the words actually needed a gesture to underscore them. To me, the best gestures have an “organic” feel to them, they seem wholly natural in the context of the words that surround them. But those two gestures struck me as having been added solely to “punch up” your speech, and not because they were natural. Thus they ring false and detract from your overall message and the audience’s perception of it.

Second, on the speech content itself: As you moved from story to story, I had trouble understanding the connection between them. Part of this was because such a large part of the first story was taken up with talking about yardwork, which was only peripheral to your real message. I’d have spent less (or no) time talking about moving your maple tree and more time talking about the threat posed by the neighbor’s tree. So as the speech moved from yardwork to the neighbor’s tree to miscarriage, my concept of the speech’s theme had to keep shifting from “work” to “risk” to “challenge”. That, too, undermined your message. Taking each story within the speech, paring it to the essentials that focus on your real message, and briefly stating the message at the end of each story would have helped enormously. They say that if you want people to remember anything, you have to say it three times. So with two stories, each one concluding with the message, and an overall speech conclusion that really lays out the message for all to see, you’ve got your three times.

Jason: I appreciate your detailed and specific speech critique. It is very helpful, and also a great example of the type of evaluation I discuss in the Speech Analysis Series .

I find your columns quite helpful! So I would pass on a couple of thoughts on your performance in Face The Wind.

I agree with the comments listed and would like to add two more. 1. Lug the tree – wrap your arms around it and walk like it is heavy. 2. Add energy to your voice. Make it more dynamic. Increase the volume range, variation and energy.

Hi, It really was a great speech. Content great. I think it could have been pruned a little to make it snappier.

Body language was perfect.

I have just delivered my ‘ice breaker’ so what do I know?!

What I feel personally is that many speeches lack congruency. What I mean by that is that although they are executed well, they don’t connect with the audience. They are a speech and not a conversation with the audience.

Anthony Robbins is that master at congruent speaking. Even though he is running through set material it is like he is doing it for the first time and its all off the cuff. You can really see his emotional connection with his words.

I think if you had attached emotional congruency with the sadness of the bad weather and also with the lost of the babies, it would have been more powerful.

Check out http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cpc-t-Uwv1I for the master at work. I have no connection to the guy what so ever but I am working on improving my skills based on his talent.

Hi, Andrew: I am preparing my third speech-get to the point and searched at web and found you web that is absolutely helpful to me-a new member of TM since Sep. this year. I read all the 1-9 of your speech preparation series (have not done the 10 as you mentioned feedback to your FACE the WIND, I decide to write you before reading the 10). I love your face the wind and reviewed it for different learning purposes from step 1 to 9. The first time I viewed it, I expected your two hands and arms would be upper or higher for “the mortgage is tripled” than you said your living space is doubled, same expectation when I reviewed it more times later. Thanks to find your web, I am more confident to prepare for the third one and wished I found you earlier, I would do better for the Ice breaker speech and the second one Organize your speech. Regards, Zhou Hui

Recent Tweets

Speech Self-Critique – http://t.co/JolmOABl #Fear #PublicSpeacking in #Brighton — The Spence Practice Oct 3rd, 2011

Speech Self-Critique – http://t.co/shTBdSyR Fear PublicSpeacking in Brighton http://t.co/CGM9rDhA — Brightonfeed Oct 3rd, 2011

Featured Articles

• Majora Carter (TED, 2006) Energy, Passion, Speaking Rate
• Hans Rosling (TED, 2006) 6 Techniques to Present Data
• J.A. Gamache (Toastmasters, 2007) Gestures, Prop, Writing
• Steve Jobs (Stanford, 2005) Figures of speech, rule of three
• Al Gore (TED, 2006) Humor, audience interaction
• Dick Hardt (OSCON, 2005) Lessig Method of Presentation

Books We Recommend

Six Minutes Copyright © 2007-2019 All Rights Reserved.

Read our permissions policy , privacy policy , or disclosure policy .

Comments? Questions? Contact us .

Statement by Jonathan McKernan, Director, FDIC Board of Directors on Climate Risk Guidance

Banks face a wide range of emerging risks. Take, for example, the risk that a breakthrough in quantum computing could suddenly pose to banks’ ability to encrypt financial transactions or customer information. Or the risk that artificial intelligence could have on banks’ cybersecurity. Or the risk that continuing federal deficits could lead to higher interest rates or even downgrades of U.S. debt.

So, if we replaced every reference in the guidance to “climate risk” or “climate-related financial risk” with a more encompassing term like “emerging risk,” I could perhaps vote for it. We could even define “emerging risk” to include “climate-related financial risk” such that the guidance would have the same legal effect, and I could still be open to supporting it.

But this guidance’s singular focus on just this one possible emerging risk among many exposes the real intent and effect. This guidance positions the U.S. bank regulators to follow the lead of their European counterparts in pushing banks to facilitate a transition to a lower carbon economy. This is all about getting bank regulators involved in the pricing and allocation of capital.

Policy decisions like this should be left to our elected leaders. Our involvement will just further politicize the bank regulators and distract us from our safety and soundness mandate.

Last Updated: October 24, 2023

Advertisement

Supported by

Harris to Lay Out Economic Message Focused on High Cost of Living

The vice president’s plans represent more of a reboot of President Biden’s economic policies than a radically fresh start.

• Share full article

By Nicholas Nehamas and Jim Tankersley

Reporting from Washington

Vice President Kamala Harris will unveil the central planks of her economic agenda on Friday in Raleigh, N.C., during her first major policy speech, focusing on how she plans to fight big corporations and bring down costs on necessities like food, housing and raising children.

Ms. Harris’s proposals for her first 100 days in the White House include efforts to combat price gouging at the grocery store , jump-start the construction of more affordable housing, restore an expanded tax credit for parents and lower the cost of prescription drugs, according to a briefing document released by her campaign. She will call for a tax incentive to build starter homes, seek to cap the cost of insulin at $35 for all Americans and attempt to reduce the cost of health insurance through the Affordable Care Act.

Taken together, her plan represents more of a reboot of President Biden’s economic policy than a radically fresh start — a new sales pitch focused on its most popular aspects, not a new vision. Many of the policies reiterate or build on proposals in Mr. Biden’s most recent presidential budget. Harris campaign officials released scattered details, leaving key questions unanswered — like the income cutoff for families to qualify for a new $6,000 child tax credit for newborns, or what exactly would qualify as grocery-store “price gouging” under a federal ban.

Campaign officials did not detail how Ms. Harris would pay for her spending and tax-cut proposals in their release ahead of the speech. But they said her overall plan would reduce projected federal deficits, like Mr. Biden’s latest budget proposed to do, largely by “asking the wealthiest Americans and largest corporations to pay their fair share.”

In terms of emphasis, her speech is expected to shift away from Mr. Biden’s focus on job creation, particularly in manufacturing, and more toward reining in the cost of living.

And she will also try to paint a strong contrast against former President Donald J. Trump, describing him as a friend to billionaires and chief executives who will not help the middle class. Ms. Harris has been attacking Mr. Trump’s proposal to impose new tariffs of up to 20 percent on all imported goods, saying it would amount to a tax increase on working families.

We are having trouble retrieving the article content.

Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and  log into  your Times account, or  subscribe  for all of The Times.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access.

Already a subscriber?  Log in .

Want all of The Times?  Subscribe .