Page 323 - Essentials of Human Communication

302 ChaPter 14 The Persuasive Speech

PubliC SPeakinG SaMPle aSSiStant

an excellent Persuasive Speech

This speech, which won first place in the 2011 Interstate Oratorical Association contest, was delivered by Patrick Mar-
tin from the University of Wisconsin Eau Claire; the speaker was coached by Karen Morris. The speech is reprinted
from Winning Orations of the Interstate Oratorical Association 2011. Mankato, MN: Interstate Oratorical Association.
This is a truly excellent example of a persuasive speech. The annotations will help guide your reading and
the questions will help guide your analysis. Some of the key terms used throughout the section on public
speaking appear in the annotations in boldface.

The Energy Cure that Kills: Hydraulic
Fracturing for Natural Gas
Patrick Martin
SPEECH ANNoTATioNS ANd QuESTioNS
The title makes the subject and the position taken very clear to the audience. It
tells you the thesis of the speech: Hydraulic fracturing kills. After reading the
entire speech, what other choices would you suggest for a title if this speech
were to be given to your class? In what other ways does the speaker identify
his thesis? The general purpose is “to persuade” and the more specific
purpose—as you’ll see when you read the speech—is to persuade the
audience to support the FRAC act.

First came a report out of Alabama. The McMillan family found their tap water The introduction contains extremely dramatic examples and makes listen-
black, oily, and bubbling. Soon after came Texas. Three ranchers said their wa- ers feel that wherever they are, this problem will affect them. These examples
ter smelled foul, and two days later, seven of their animals were dead. Ohio. A gain the attention of the listeners and make the topic relevant to them. In
gas buildup in the Payne family’s basement well caused the house to ex- what other ways might this speech have been introduced?
plode, and testing found similar levels in the wells of 22 neighbors. Even now,
across the country, folks are realizing that with just a match, they can light
their tap water on fire. As reports mount, a shocking revelation is taking
shape. For years, the drinking water of tens of millions of Americans has been
systematically poisoned with chemicals like arsenic, formaldehyde, and sulfu-
ric acid. But far from acts of terrorism, this sabotage is not only allowed by our
government, but subsidized. It’s called hydraulic fracturing, a drilling tech-
nique which harnesses incredible amounts of natural gas, but at the cost of
destroying our most precious resource, our drinking water. Tragically, to a fed-
eral government desperate for domestic energy, and awash in industry
money, this price has been deemed acceptable. The New York Times of April 1,
2011, notes the Obama administration is calling fracturing the key to our en-
ergy future.
In order to understand the fundamental threat fracturing poses, we must The orientation is especially clear; you know that the major parts of the speech are
first understand the dangers at each step of the process, second, expose the (1) the dangers, (2) the corrupt maneuvering, and (3) the solution. This is clearly a
corrupt legal maneuvering which protects it, and finally, champion the simple problem-solution organizational pattern. The speaker identifies two related
solution that will save American lives. For too long, hydraulic fracturing has problems—the dangers and the corruption—and the solution (which the speaker
made a threat out of something we should never have to fear, our next glass holds back until he’s convinced that the audience can appreciate the dangers).
of water. Would you have identified the solution here?

Thanks to hydraulic fracturing, natural gas has become one of our nation’s Here the speaker elaborates on the first problem—the dangers posed by
fastest growing industries. The Department of Energy predicts that America’s hydraulic fracturing to our own drinking water and to the air we breathe and
450,000 wells will, this year alone, pump over 100 billion gallons of toxins into that this presents “significant risks for cancer.” Has what the speaker said
U.S. soil. To understand the scope of this destruction, we must examine its convinced you that there’s a problem? If not, what else might the speaker
two major steps, the drilling itself, and the waste water disposal. ProPublica of have said that would have convinced you?
December 31, 2009, reports the first step on hydraulic fracturing is to pump
up to seven million gallons of toxic chemicals at high pressure into the
ground. These fluids at such pressure crack the subterranean rock and free
the gases to flow to the surface. However, there are countless problems with
this. Often, those cracks can extend miles into the groundwater supplies, al-
lowing millions of gallons of toxic sludge and misdirected gas to flow right