The Art of Speech
First, watch the video. Go ahead. I'll wait for you.
Now... This isn't about "whose side you're on". This is about the "Art of Speech." So, for the time being, put aside your political perspectives and let's talk about what's being said and how it's being said.
I was introduced to the work of Keith Olbermann a couple months ago, and I was immediately impressed with him. Yes, part of it comes from the fact that I agree with his views, but the greater majority of it is simply how he speaks.
I spent 5 years coaching high school students in competitive public speaking. Most of them were reading prose or poetry, but a few were giving speeches. And, during the competitions, I was charged with judging students on their ability to give speeches. I wish Olbermann had been doing these commentaries back then. He's the perfect example of how to give an informative and persuasive speech.
He's articulate. He's well-paced. He has a wonderful variation of tone, volume, and intensity. These are so difficult to explain to students, yet so important for them to have. But Olbermann does more than that. He starts with a well-crafted text:
"From springs trying to link Saddam Hussein to 9/11, to summers of cynically-manipulated intelligence, through autumns of false patriotism, to winters of war...."
The pace and imagery of that passage is both powerful and direct. The words speak so much more than their definitions. He refers to the Bush Administration as "3-card monty players"; a phrase which not only describes their actions as dishonest, but also implies that nobody of intelligence will believe that these actions are anything but a sham--one that will leave the marks citizenry with few dollars in their pockets and nothing to show for it.
It's these little turns of phrase that make Olberman's commentaries so sharp. He pulls no punches. He grabs hold of the important details, tossing all the rhetoric and spin to the side, and gets to the very heart of the matter at hand. But most importantly, he does it without insulting the intelligence of his viewers.
90% of the commentators out there could learn a lesson from this--as could an equal number of politicians. The trend of public speeches over the last several decades has been towards the lowest common denominator. Gone are the days of powerful statements and memorable speeches. FDR let us know that "there is nothing to fear but fear itself". JFK instructed us to "Ask not what your country can do for you; ask what you can do for your country." And MLK changed the course of history with four simple words: "I have a dream."
Excluding pithy catch phrases like "a thousand points of light" and "read my lips: no new taxes"--both sound bites designed for maximum repetition rather than maximum impact--can any one of you quote from a speech given in the last 20 years? Can any one of you remember a speech given in the last 20 years?
The important thing about Keith Olbermann isn't whose side he's on. It's how he represents that side. Right now, the "big voices" for the right wing are Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter. Their words are little more than vitriol aimed at riling up the agreeing masses. There's no skill in preaching to the choir. While Olbermann does, of course, appeal to the left wing, his push seems more to point out flaws and educate the public than to rally the agreeable around him.
I give MSNBC credit for letting him speak. His commentaries are forceful, sharp, and geared towards those with a higher intelligence: three factors that don't exactly make for high ratings. And yet.... he's managed to make himself popular. From the standpoint of someone trained in the art of speech, I can say that it's not about who he's attacking, but rather about the skil with with which he attacks.
I will admit that I'm curious to see what happens to the content and tone of his commentaries if the next President is a democrat. I hope he continues exactly as he is: voicing criticism of the the President and his administration, regardless of the political party.
I'd be very interested to hear what he has to say from the "other side".
Imported from the Buzz
Now... This isn't about "whose side you're on". This is about the "Art of Speech." So, for the time being, put aside your political perspectives and let's talk about what's being said and how it's being said.
I was introduced to the work of Keith Olbermann a couple months ago, and I was immediately impressed with him. Yes, part of it comes from the fact that I agree with his views, but the greater majority of it is simply how he speaks.
I spent 5 years coaching high school students in competitive public speaking. Most of them were reading prose or poetry, but a few were giving speeches. And, during the competitions, I was charged with judging students on their ability to give speeches. I wish Olbermann had been doing these commentaries back then. He's the perfect example of how to give an informative and persuasive speech.
He's articulate. He's well-paced. He has a wonderful variation of tone, volume, and intensity. These are so difficult to explain to students, yet so important for them to have. But Olbermann does more than that. He starts with a well-crafted text:
"From springs trying to link Saddam Hussein to 9/11, to summers of cynically-manipulated intelligence, through autumns of false patriotism, to winters of war...."
The pace and imagery of that passage is both powerful and direct. The words speak so much more than their definitions. He refers to the Bush Administration as "3-card monty players"; a phrase which not only describes their actions as dishonest, but also implies that nobody of intelligence will believe that these actions are anything but a sham--one that will leave the marks citizenry with few dollars in their pockets and nothing to show for it.
It's these little turns of phrase that make Olberman's commentaries so sharp. He pulls no punches. He grabs hold of the important details, tossing all the rhetoric and spin to the side, and gets to the very heart of the matter at hand. But most importantly, he does it without insulting the intelligence of his viewers.
90% of the commentators out there could learn a lesson from this--as could an equal number of politicians. The trend of public speeches over the last several decades has been towards the lowest common denominator. Gone are the days of powerful statements and memorable speeches. FDR let us know that "there is nothing to fear but fear itself". JFK instructed us to "Ask not what your country can do for you; ask what you can do for your country." And MLK changed the course of history with four simple words: "I have a dream."
Excluding pithy catch phrases like "a thousand points of light" and "read my lips: no new taxes"--both sound bites designed for maximum repetition rather than maximum impact--can any one of you quote from a speech given in the last 20 years? Can any one of you remember a speech given in the last 20 years?
The important thing about Keith Olbermann isn't whose side he's on. It's how he represents that side. Right now, the "big voices" for the right wing are Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter. Their words are little more than vitriol aimed at riling up the agreeing masses. There's no skill in preaching to the choir. While Olbermann does, of course, appeal to the left wing, his push seems more to point out flaws and educate the public than to rally the agreeable around him.
I give MSNBC credit for letting him speak. His commentaries are forceful, sharp, and geared towards those with a higher intelligence: three factors that don't exactly make for high ratings. And yet.... he's managed to make himself popular. From the standpoint of someone trained in the art of speech, I can say that it's not about who he's attacking, but rather about the skil with with which he attacks.
I will admit that I'm curious to see what happens to the content and tone of his commentaries if the next President is a democrat. I hope he continues exactly as he is: voicing criticism of the the President and his administration, regardless of the political party.
I'd be very interested to hear what he has to say from the "other side".
Imported from the Buzz