My Rhetorical Action Plan

My Rhetorical Action Plan 

A rhetorical action plan is imperative to one's ability to effectively convey an idea or purpose. Below is my rhetorical action plan for my act of public speech. 

Appelo, Jurgen. "PDCA-Plan." 3/1/12 via flickr. Creative Commons Attribution.

• Audience:
• Knowledge: The audience is expected to know the basics of genetic engineering. While my article will go into a little bit of depth about genetic engineering it will only give enough to help them understand how beneficial genetic engineering is rather than being just an in depth informational piece. Although some of the audience may have ideas about genetic engineering already it is unlikely that they will be extremely well versed in their beliefs. 
• Values: I believe that the general audience will have values that encourage advancements in the sciences as innovation in general. Because of this I am hopeful that they will be more likely to support the idea of genetic engineering. 
• Standards of Argument: I think that scholarly research will be persuasive for my audience but I also think that more personal stories with less educated notion will be helpful in giving them both parts of genetic engineering. I think I will need to put it in terms that the general public will understand so it won't just be like reading a dry and dull piece. 
• Visual Elements: I think that with this topic the idea of visual elements is not extremely necessary because it is hard to convey over pictures. While a few graphs or charts might be beneficial it is yet to be determined how helpful they would be. 
• Purpose: The audience is reading the argument due to the fact that they want to learn more about the genetic engineering controversy as a whole. They will have found my article because they are interested in the topic and want to understand it. I will be trying to expand understanding about genetic engineering while also help encourage support of genetic engineering. I think that if I have a strong argument with much different evidence then it is likely that they will be motivated to look for other sources in efforts to understand further the genetic engineering controversy. 
• Genre 1: Article written for The Huffington Post 
• Examples:
•  "These Advances In Lab-Grown Organs Might Save Your Life One Day"
• "Genetically Engineered Babies? Experts Debate Idea Of 'Designer Baby' Ban"
• The function of this genre is to help further the audience's understanding about genetic engineering through somewhat scholarly writing. This Huffington Post is a pretty popular site for online publication of scholarly research so I think it would be appropriate to publish here so that a majority of society would see it. 
• The setting of the genre is in the Huffington Post.
• In my article I think that I will use a mix of the rhetorical appeals we have studied in order to connect with my audience. The most effective articles that I have read have used a combination of the different rhetorical appeals so I think I will employ that tactic to make an effective argument. 
• This type of genre doesn't include visual elements so I don't think I will use any. 
• The style of this genre would be somewhat formal with a mix between conversational and academic. While it is not going to be published in a scholarly journal it still needs to sound educated and formal enough to provide the readers with my character's credibility. 
• Genre 2: Podcast interview about genetic engineering 
• Examples: 
• "Proposed Treatment To Fix Genetic Diseases Raises Ethical Issues"
• "Should we genetically engineer humans?"
• The genre provides readers with an opportunity to listen to interviews and podcasts regarding genetic engineering rather than having to read through an article. There are a number of locations where this could be published were many readers would be able to listen to it. It would be effective in helping readers understand the concepts on a more relatable level in a talked out way. 
• The setting of the genre could be any place which publishes podcasts, hopefully a well known location such as NPR or something of the sort. 
• For this genre I would focus mostly on logos and ethos due to the fact that my credibility will have already been proven because I was able to make it on to a podcast in general. 
• This genre doesn't use visual elements because it is all auditory. 
• The sale of this will be formal conversational. It will need to be appropriate to be publicly published but I will be partaking in a conversation with the person asking questions regarding the topic. 
• Responses/Actions:
• Positive Reactions:
• Increased interest in genetic engineering 
• Rise in support of genetic engineering 
• Recognition of and accreditation to importance of scientific advancement 
• Explain to people how the topic could relate to them in the future 
• Negative Rebuttals:
• People recognize they don't believe in it after reading further about unsuccessful attempts 
• Although some failures, there is much room for improvement still being made 
• Continued rebuttal from the "unethical" standpoint of genetic engineering
• Show how benefits of scientific advancements far outweigh the costs of the possibility of being unethical
• Increased worry in potentially becoming a society based solely on designer babies 
• Recognition of how there may be some of this but very much of it is unlikely