I attended Scott Barclay’s discussion, Why aren't there activist judges on the issue of same-sex marriage?, based off of his research into judicial activism and legislation on Thursday, February 10th. Barclay addressed the issue of same-sex marriages and the lack of activist judges by using various types of rhetoric, mostly the pathos, ethos, and the inherent kairos of this issue. By using solid techniques while using an effective presentation method, Scott Barclay was able to appeal to his audience about his views and academic overview of the issue.
Barclay focused on addressing the various educational and interest backgrounds of his audience by using easy-to-understand language and presentation methods. The presenter was addressing the small voluntary audience in a university conference room. This choice of venue made sure that only persons associated with the University of Denver would come to the conference, and that a smaller audience would have more freedom in asking questions and providing insight into the topics of activist judges and same-sex marriage. As a person in the audience, I did not feel like I was just a ‘face in a large crowd’- I knew that I was a member in an audience whose opinions and views were appreciated.
The fifteen person audience was generally composed of staff and faculty of the University of Denver, with only two or three students attending. The majority of the faculty was in the social sciences and studies at the University of Denver, and may have had biases in affirmation of the topic. Students had lesser knowledge of the topics at hand, and were at a disadvantage at understanding all the research that the speaker provided. Scott Barclay was dressed in neutral tones (light tan suit with shirt), which didn’t give him power colors. He may have done this on purpose to not seem imposing but to educate his audience on the issue. The suit choice also made him look more like a lecturing professor, which added to his credibility as an academic.
Barclay was introduced in a short speech, introducing him as an academic speaker and a prominent researcher in social sciences issues. The speaker introduced his argument and research by introducing his background in education and by giving the audience his fifteen-page article, titled, In Search of Judicial Activism in the Same-Sex Marriage Cases: Sorting the Evidence from Courts, Legislatures, Initiatives, and Amendments. Scott Barclay’s research and education gave him ethos because he commanded a sense of knowledge and leadership in his topic. The audience trusted Barclay in his knowledge and him leading into the topic.
Scott Barclay also made use of a PowerPoint presentation while he was speaking, which would simplify and clarify points that the audience may have missed. The PowerPoint presentation also introduced visual elements into the discussion, which illustrated the constantly changing views of the public, legislation, and courts, which reflect the current kairos of the decision of same-sex marriage. The PowerPoint showed that as time has gone on, there has been more legislation and judgments in favor of same-sex marriage. As time goes on into today, we see the kairos of the situation come to a tipping point.
While the speaker presented about the lack of activist judges, he stayed stationary and off to a corner in the room, not coming towards the long table that filled the center of the room. Barclay would occasionally gesture with his hands, but would only move to change the slides of the PowerPoint and to recheck his points. This didn’t seem like a strong technique because the attention became more focused on the visual presentation of the PowerPoint than the speaker. This was only saved due to his imposing height and his strong Australian accent, which kept the attention of the audience.
When the presentation concluded, the general mood of the audience was of interest except for the students who had chosen to attend. The majority of Barclay’s arguments were based in social science knowledge, and for students such as myself, much of the background knowledge went over my head. I know the gist of the issue, but nothing of the activist judges and what exactly the roles they played in government. The staff and faculty that attended did ask questions pertaining to the clarification of some of his points, but none of the students asked questions. In order to improve his argument to audiences, Barclay should tailor his presentations to different types of audiences and educational backgrounds.
No comments:
Post a Comment