Audience? Credibility or Position? or Delivery?
Would MLK's "I Have a Dream" be as good a speech if it was delivered by Bob Jones, middle class white guy, to a small group of people in Minnesota?
George Bush has the Position, and the built in Audience, but does his Delivery diminish his impact? Was Clinton's great Delivery hindered by his failing Credibility in the wake of Lewinsky?
Rich Hopkins - ATM-G
Having recently viewed a documentary on Gandhi, I made note of his
presence, and how he presented his message to a variety of audiences.
While it is tempting to rank delivery with content as most important
for Toastmasters, the truth is more apparent by "following the money"
or the response by the audience. The audience will vote with their
feet and ears (as in India) or their money (as in the western culture).
Gandhi or MLK or Lincoln gave messages that resonated with the audience
for a deeper, purposeful meaning. All three speakers had the innate
purpose of freedom for mankind when they spoke.
Gandhi developed his audience with his actions and convictions. Gandhi
also was a prolific writer to create credibility. Gandhi had a
delivery style that could be considered his own by speaking with his
shirt off and commanding attention with his universal message of non
aggression.
So a deep purpose trumps personality (Clinton) or position (Bush) to
have a great audience.
Rocky Romero
Comments