Paul Eschholz comments that “Political language is powerful; it is persuasive.

English 111: Paper #2 and Rubric (Spring 2016)
Topic: Paul Eschholz comments that “Political language is powerful; it is persuasive. At its best political language inspires people

and challenges them to make a difference, offering the hope that in working together, we can create a better world […]. At its worst,

political language can be deliberately manipulated to mislead, deceive, or cover up” (Language Awareness, 8th edition, p. 147).
Review the following readings in Language Awareness (Chapter 8) “Language that Manipulates”:
“Propaganda: How Not to Be Bamboozled” pp. 209-219
“Selection, Slanting, and Charged Language” pp. 223-231
“The World of Doublespeak” pp. 248-258
You will want to be very familiar with the content of these readings since they will be the only valid resources from which you may

draw for your evidence/support. Be sure to use at least four (4) relevant quotes from the assigned readings above, from all three (3)

of the different assigned essays.

Writing Assignment:Analyze and discuss how language can be manipulated for political purposes.
• Double space your essay with one-inch margins all around.
• Submit this paper to the Dropbox
• Length: at least three (3) pages, double spaced

You will be evaluated using the following Rubric:
______/15: Content
• Understanding of assignment
• Accuracy
• In-depth analysis
______/15: Clear generalizations and carefully drawn support
• Relevant, clearly stated generalizations
• Adequate, relevant support/evidence integrated smoothly into your paper
• At least four (4) relevant quotes from the assigned above readings, quotes from all three (3) different assigned essays
______/10: Framework supports general thesis
• Thesis is clearly stated and underlined at the end of the introductory paragraph
• Generalizations follow a logical development of thesis
• Ideas are presented in a coherent pattern (clear transitions)
• A beginning, middle, and conclusion
______/5: Precise, forceful expression of ideas
• Clear, smooth sentence structure/syntax
• Correct mechanics (grammar, spelling, punctuation)
• Sophisticated diction
______/5: Documentation and Acknowledgements
• Documentation in correct and current MLA format in text and on the Works Cited page
• One Reader Response Sheet commenting on someone else’s Paper #2
• An Acknowledgements page giving credit to those people who helped you with the paper
______/50 total 50-46=A 45-41=B 40-36=C 35-31=D
Comments:
1) In the sample paper below, notice the clear organization: the four points in the thesis statement and how Hunter follows

through with those points in the body of his paper. He uses solid examples from the book, documented correctly. One suggestion for

Hunter: offer examples of politicians campaigning in 2014. For example, Scott Walker ran an especially bitter campaign last year

advertising with lots of personal attacks against Mary Burke, his opponent.

Hunter Panning
Dr. Carducci
Paper #2
01/27/2015
“For good or for evil, propaganda pervades our daily lives, helping shape our attitudes on a thousand subjects” (210). Whether that

statement is accurate or not, propaganda is a very important tool, good or bad, that is used by almost every politician to provide a

standard of language to enrich his or her campaign. Every politician running for office will say that his or her main goal is to be

liked and understood. In order to do that,politicians use propagandasuch a name-calling, the plain-folks appeal, doublespeak, and

silencing to manipulate and sell their ideas to voters across the country.
In an essay, “Propaganda: How Not to Be Bamboozled,”written by Donna Woolfolk Cross, she provides twopowerful ways politicians use

propaganda to their advantage. “Name-Calling ” is usefulby “labeling people or ideas with words or bad connotations, literally,

‘calling them names’” (210). A campaign artist will use “Name-Calling” when he or she is trying to put down anopponent or trying to

make bad of an idea formed by the opposing side. “Name-calling can be used against policies, practices, beliefs and ideas, as well as

individuals, groups, races, and nations” (210). It’s one of the strongest ways to attack the opposing side. For example,

“Congresswoman Jane Doe is a bleeding-heart” or “The senator is a tool of Washington” (210)! It’s used it for insulting someone too.

“Foolish idealist,” “Two-faced liar” (210)!
Furthermore, “Plain-Folk Appeal ” is a way to make a powerful connection with the audience. “The Plain-Folks Appeal is at work when

candidates go around shaking hands of factory workers, kissing babies in super markets, and sampling pasta with Italians, friend

chicken with Southerners, bagels and blintzes with Jews” (211). “I’ve been a farm boy all my life” or “Now I’m a businessman like

yourselves” (211). Politicians use these “appeals” to make personal connections, to let their audience know that, yes, they are indeed

people too, they understand problems, they know what it’s like to live that way. That being said, some of those personal connections

made may be completely made up, but politicians will do anything to make their audience happy.
Ever heard of the term “Politically correct?” In an essay “The World of Doublespeak” written by William Lutz, “Politically correct” or

what he calls, “Doublespeak” , is a new form of saying things that make us feel uncomfortable or offensive. Politicians use this to

their advantage as well. “Farmers no longer have cows, pigs, chickens or other animals on their farms; according to the U.S department

of Agriculture, farmers have ‘grain-consuming animal units’”(248). “… And that President Reagan wasn’t really unconscious while he

underwent minor surgery, he was just in a ‘non-decision-making form’” (249). Lutz uses prime examples of how “doublespeaking” could be

used in a political campaign to ease some tension between the politician and audience. Human sexuality is a common topic spoken about

in a political campaign. “Queer” was a widely accepted term to describe a gay person in the early 1900’s. Because of the way people

started using the word “Queer,” it became a very derogatory term. Before it became such a term, politicians could use that term freely

to discuss new laws regarding marriage. Today, if a politician were to use that word during a campaign, he or she would be sure to have

no chance at being elected into office. So, instead they’re going to “doublespeak” or use a “politically correct” term like

“homosexual” or “gay”: same exact word, just desensitized. “Doublespeaking” is a great tool to talk about sensitive topics while

campaigning.
“It is possible to silence people by denying them access to the vocabulary to express their claims” (261).In an essay written by Jason

Stanley, he analyzes the power to take words away from people before they start to speak. “There are multiple purposes to a political

speech, only one of which is to assert truths” (261). That seems a little counterintuitive, doesn’t it? We seem to have this

overwhelming sense of trust in our political leaders. Too much trust one could suggest. “In silencing, one removes the ability of a

target person or group to communicate” (262). Silencing is a tool often used during political debates. When two opposing politicians

are debating on national television, their instinct is to keep talking so that the other side doesn’t have to change to rebuttal.

During a political debate, there is one person that has a very powerful job, that is, setting the stopwatch for each response. When the

emcee of the debate gives the question, each side has an equal opportunity to answer it, only for a certain amount of time, though. In

a fair debate, there is no tolerance for “silencing.”So why is it propaganda? To some oblivious viewers, if one side has the chance to

silence the other with ahasty statement, the viewer may translate the lack of response as being illiterate or unqualified for the

position.
We learned at a young age that words speak louder than actions. Political campaigns only multiply the evidence of that statement. “It

is worthwhile bearing in mind the dangers of the manipulation of language” (262). Political leadership understands the power of

language and uses its every last piece to their advantage. The public must never take words at face value; voters mustinvestigate,

analyze, and interpret every idea said by a politician. fIf an educated citizen can see through the rhetoric, recognizing propaganda

will become second nature and that citizen will not be fooled mindlessly by campaign ads.

Works Cited
Lutz, Willian. “The World of Doublespeak.” Language Awareness. Ed. Paul A. Eschholz, Alfred F. Rosa, and Virginia P. Clark. 11th ed.

New York: St. Martin’s, 1978. 248-58. Print.
Stanley, Jason. “Language That Silences.” Language Awareness. Ed. Comp. Paul A. Eschholz, Alfred F. Rosa, and Virginia P. Clark. 11th

ed. New York: St. Martin’s, 1978. 260-62. Print.
Woolfolk Cross, Donna. “Propaganda: How Not to Be Bamboozled.” Language Awareness. Ed.Paul A. Eschholz, Alfred F. Rosa, and Virginia P.

Clark. 11th ed. New York: St. Martin’s, 1978. 209-19. Print.
2) Paper #2 Notice the specific examples that Mariah Meltz uses below:
Argumentum ad populummeans “argument to the people” or “telling the people what they want to hear” (Cross 212). Frankly, we the people

want to hear complementary and uplifting things about ourselves. An example of this is when a politician uses the cliché “hardworking

taxpayers”(Cross 212). For example, in Scott Walker’s “state of the state” speech on January 13th, 2015, he refers to the hardworking

taxpayers of Wisconsin. This is a common reference because the Americans who hold jobs get their paychecks deducted for federal taxes.

This angers us because we feel that is our hard earned money is being taken away. So, nothing makes us feel better than being

recognized for our hard work by a leader. In this instance, Walker was stroking us, telling us what we want to hear.

TAKE ADVANTAGE OF OUR PROMOTIONAL DISCOUNT DISPLAYED ON THE WEBSITE AND GET A DISCOUNT FOR YOUR PAPER NOW!