Rhetorical velocity is the conscious strategy on how to deliver an argument. Rhetoricians need to have a specific plan to implement their ideas and how to most effectively convey their message to the public. Some questions to consider while making this plan are: Who is interested in this topic? How will they interpret and then recompose the work? What long and short term effects will this have on the overall delivery of the argument. As I have stated in previous blog posts, it is vital to an effective argument to know both your audience and how to best deliver the message to the audience so that they can understand it. This is a basic foundation of rhetorical velocity. If your audience is mostly from the younger generations, i.e. millennials and generation X, the internet and social media are perfect mediums to deliver a message. For example, the use of hashtags (#) has become a staple of social media today. Hashtags allow users to track what is trending at any moment in social media, the more popular the hashtag, the more people see the posts associated with it. While creating a trending topic on Twitter of Instagram can be a tall task, using hashtags will at least connect you to a community of users that are talking about the same topic. Anything posted online has the potential to reach any person with an internet connection in seconds and it is there forever. Using the internet has been a main strategy of businesses, politicians and anyone with something to say since the rise of social media and in today’s world, it is almost unheard of to neglect the power of the internet.
Another main part of rhetorical velocity is building the message for the distinct purpose of recomposition – or the aim that the audience will “recompose” you message and distribute it further for their own audiences. Ridolfo and DeVoss claim that using “building blocks” is a good way to do this. In other words, provide your audience with the proper materials and information to and materials to build an argument of their own. Using recomposition effectively can be the difference between creating the next trending topic or being just another tweet in the sea of information on the internet.
You raised some interesting questions that every author should attempt to answer when writing a piece for the public. Every author should know who they are targeting and at least have an idea of how their audience will react to the piece. You made a good point about how social media and the internet has accelerated rhetorical velocity now. Hashtags and trending topics on the two largest social media platforms, Twitter and Facebook, have allowed any article to catch the wave of relevancy. It’s as you say “Anything posted online has the potential to reach any person with an internet connection in seconds and it is there forever”. With the sheer amount of views that any piece can garner today, there is vast potential for any author to seize the moment and have their piece recomposed. Being easily recomposed is very important as it will add longevity to the idea that the author wants to impart.
Rob, you write, ” As I have stated in previous blog posts, it is vital to an effective argument to know both your audience and how to best deliver the message to the audience so that they can understand it.”
As someone who loves the idea of contextualization, or packaging a message for so that it is most appealing to an audience, I found your comment to be most helpful, namely, that we must “deliver the message to the audience so that they can understand it.” For rhetorical velocity’s sake, contextualization becomes a big deal because in order for people to send the received message forward in their own ingenious way they must indeed understand the message. How can I engage in rhetorical velocity if the very message I am seeking to push forward in perhaps a new dynamic way is not understandable to me.
I just applied to a PhD program in intercultural studies. The whole point of that degree program is to make messages so that others can comprehend them in their contexts. This notion of properly packaging information for understand-ability is lost in a culture that is very me-focus. I admit to this problem. Since I understand the content, why must I present it to others in a different way? They need to step up to my level. Right? Wrong! There is a humility we must exhibit if we are to win people to our causes, and that begins in making sure the information we want them to promote can be understood. It’s just being respectful as well. Peace!!
I had never thought about it until your post, but hashtags can absolutely be considered rhetorical velocity. People and organizations can contribute their own commentary on a situation in a post and then add a hashtag as it pertains to transpiring events. I remember after Eric Garner was killed and “#ICantBreathe” was a relevant way to find other commentary on that situation. It actually transcended the virtual realm and became a prominent chant at some of the protests I attended. Even things of less consequence than that are accelerated by hashtags. It’s a really great way to organize discussions or just generate buzz. When the Pirates went to the playoffs for the first time in my memory, the hashtag was “PNCBlackout” or something to that efffect. The power of seeing that trending on Twitter was special to me, but its communicative power was intentional use of rhetorical velocity.