speech on ethics in english

Speechwriting

11 Ethics in Public Speaking

Being a Speaker the Audience Can Trust

In this chapter . . .

In this chapter, you will learn about the importance of ethics in both writing and delivering public speeches. The two major aspects of ethics in terms of public speaking are credibility and plagiarism. We define these issues and present strategies for increasing your credibility and preventing plagiarism, thus allowing you to deliver ethical and effective speeches.

In the fourth century BCE, the classic philosopher Aristotle took up the study of the public speaking practices of the ruling class in Athenian society. For two years he observed the men (it was only men) who spoke publicly in the assembly and the courts. In the end, he developed a theory about persuasiveness that has come down to us in history as a written treatise called Rhetoric. Among his many ideas was the identification of three elements essential to effective public speaking: ethos , logos , and pathos . In short, these mean credibility, reasonability, and emotion.

In this chapter, we will focus on what Aristotle called ethos and what we today would call ethical public speaking . Ethics refers to the branch of philosophy that involves a determination of what is right and moral. On a personal level, it’s a standard of what you should and should not do in various situations. Although ethics are based on personal decisions and values, they are also influenced by factors outside of you.

Ethical Public Speaking

Ethical Public Speaking refers to those aspects of public speaking that pertain to the personal character of a public speaker and the quality of the content they present in a speech. It involves honest research and truthful presentation, good intentions towards the audience, and the integrity of ideas. We are ethical speakers when we write and present speeches that respect these values.

Honesty & Truthfulness

Ethical public speaking requires adherence to factual truth and respect for your audience. This means that you’ll do your best to present factual, well-documented information designed to improve their lives and help them make informed, intelligent decisions with it. Honesty and truthfulness mean not telling lies and being thorough in representing the truth. When quotes are intentionally taken out of context to misrepresent the original author’s intent or to deceive the audience this isn’t honest research. You may have heard of the phrase “cherry-picking facts.” That’s when essential information is ignored in order to promote one version of the facts. When this happens, honesty fails because the truth is skewed.

A speaker is ethical when the intention of their communication is in the best interest of the audience. It means approaching the speech with honest purpose and wanting the best experience for the audience. If a speaker aims at manipulation, falsifies information, insults the audience, or simply has no intention of fulfilling the purpose of a speech, then they are not acting with good will.

When public speakers research and write speeches, they are expected to do so in a way that respects the sources from which they gain their knowledge and ideas. Furthermore, it’s the responsibility of the speaker to utilize factually accurate sources. When using sources known to be biased it’s important to acknowledge this. This is no different from the way that any writers (students, journalists, researchers, and teachers) are expected to acknowledge the sources of ideas. When we fail to do that, it’s called plagiarism. Plagiarism is unethical and will be discussed in depth below.

When a public speaker successfully conveys to their audience that they possess the qualities of integrity, good will, honesty, and truthfulness, then they have established speaker credibility . “Credibility” means the “quality that someone or something has that makes people believe or trust them” (Oxford Learner’s Dictionary). The success of any speech depends on the speaker’s establishing credibility with their audience. Simple forms of credibility statements form a part of the introduction of a speech, as described in the chapter Introductions and Conclusions . What follows in this chapter is a more in-depth discussion of this important quality.

Being a Credible Speaker

Speaker credibility is the positive attitude that the audience acquires toward a speaker. It’s based on both reality and perception and leads the audience to believe that the speaker is honest and competent. An audience wants to be “in good hands” and they use their intelligence and powers of observation to judge whether they should put their trust in a speaker.

Credibility is a product of both the content of a speech and its delivery. It’s related to what the audience hears in a speech as well as their perceptions, or even gut feelings, about the intangible characteristics of the speaker such as appearance, friendliness, sense of humor, likability, poise, and communication ability. It’s hard to overestimate the importance of establishing speaker credibility.

Let’s assume you’re giving an informative speech and you have worked diligently on all the elements of ethical public speaking. The content of your speech is honest (based on fact) and truthful (not “cherry-picked”). You’ve been careful to cite your research sources properly. You have the good intention to educate your audience about the topic and you will avoid manipulating, talking down to, or insulting your audience. You’re a credible speaker, certainly. However, your challenge is this: how do you convey to the audience that you are credible? What are the signs of credibility that they will hear and see? What do you say or do as a speaker so that the audience knows they are “in good hands”—that they can trust in you and in what you have to say?

Because credibility is made up of many factors, both verbal and non-verbal, this isn’t a simple question to answer. Establishing credibility is achieved in both speechwriting and delivery.

Establishing Credibility through Speechwriting

Some of the traits of credibility that a speaker conveys through speechwriting include:

A speaker is credible when they establish their competence on a topic. Competence means the speaker possesses the right level of expertise and sound knowledge about the speech topic, which they have acquired through research or firsthand experience. The speaker explains what the topic means to them and how they learned about it, with statements like: “I started studying the history of Ukraine last year and became fascinated by the people I met” or “I’ve always loved animals and have been volunteering at my local humane society for the past three years.”

Organization

A speaker establishes credibility with a speech that is organized and allows the audience to follow. Good, structured speeches allow the audience to relax and trust the speaker. Organized speeches state and restate their thesis and main ideas, using redundancy to beneficial effect. They allow the audience to follow along by providing connections, summaries, and previews.

Relationship

A speaker becomes credible by establishing a relationship with the audience. The speaker shows that they have thought about who the audience is, both demographically and psychographically and may say something like “I’m happy to be speaking to a group of new voters.” The speaker introduces themselves (if they haven’t already been introduced by a host); and finds common ground with the audience and communicates these similarities. “Like you, I understand the challenges of being a student athlete . . . ” or “I know it must be strange to hear a 21-year-old talk to you today about retirement, but I helped my grandparents for several years and . . .”

A speaker is credible to an audience when they make use of, and cite, credible sources. Quotations without acknowledgments or mentioning sources by saying “I read on a website that . . . ” will not gain the trust of audience. In speeches that involve research, that present information beyond your own experience, be sure to properly acknowledge your sources. Not doing so will sow the seeds of doubt in an audience and undermine their trust. In speechwriting, this is called “spoken citation” and will be discussed further on in this chapter.

The Importance of the Introduction

While credibility through speechwriting is established throughout the entire speech, pay close attention to the introduction. The introduction is crucial to establishing your credibility. The introduction is the part of the speech where you state your topic and tell the audience why you chose it, what expertise you bring to it, and what it means to you. It’s also the part of the speech when you state your name and affiliation and establish the common interests you share with your audience.

Establishing Credibility through Delivery

Preparation.

Speakers are credible to an audience when they show they are prepared. Unless it’s an entirely impromptu speech occasion, the audience expects a speaker to be ready to speak. Unprepared, unrehearsed, messy, or incomplete notes, losing their place, going off on a tangent, going over allotted time—these are things that will diminish credibility.

A Proper Start

Pay attention to how you enter the speaking area and take stage. Body language speaks volumes. This is where “good will” shows itself. If you drag your feet to the stage and look as if giving a speech is the last thing you want to do, why would the audience trust you to care about them?

Pace and Volume

An audience feels that they can trust a speaker who takes the time to speak to them at a comfortable pace and with a volume they can hear.

Eye Contact

A speaker enhances their credibility with an audience through eye contact, establishing a relationship with the audience. An audience wants to be seen. Engaging with them physically helps them stay engaged with your content.

Body Language

Maintaining good posture throughout the speech gives the audience more confidence in you. This will also ensure better volume and eye contact. Using clear and intentional gestures emphasizes particular points and makes the speech visual more interesting.

A Proper Ending

As with a proper start, how you leave the stage is an element in the impression the audience will take away.

On Speaker Credibility—Other Considerations

Before you can encourage the audience’s trust in you, you need to do some self-examination about the elements of credibility that you possess in general and in relation to the specific speech occasion. This is a necessary step. An honest assessment of your credibility will help you in two ways: First, it helps you strategize how you will convey your strengths to the audience, and second, it helps you avoid dishonest or exaggerated claims of credibility. Ask yourself: Is your speech content honest and truthful? Have you done your best to make your speech easy to follow and understand? What do you want for your audience? Who is your audience and what do you have in common with them?

If credibility is a matter of audience perception, does that mean that credibility is only what a speaker manages to get the audience to believe about them, rather than what is actually true about the speaker? Of course not. The factors of credibility and ethical public speaking must be real before a speaker can successfully convey these qualities to an audience.

That said, it’s an unfortunate fact of public discourse that speakers misrepresent their credibility all the time, either intentionally or unintentionally. Can you think of situations where speakers pretended to be experts when they were not? When they say that they really care about a subject when there is evidence to the contrary? Or, they boast of having similarities with an audience—for example, boasting of a religious affiliation with the audience—but they don’t really possess these similarities? To intentionally misrepresent your background, such as experience and credentials, is clearly unethical. No doubt you can think of many such instances.

Unethical speakers do this because they know how important it’s to establish credibility with an audience. But managing to pass off lies about your credibility doesn’t mean you’re actually credible ! Perceptive audience members will know the difference.

Defining Plagiarism

An ethical public speaker has integrity. Although there are many ways that you could undermine your ethical stance before an audience, the one that stands out and is committed most in academic contexts is plagiarism . A dictionary definition of plagiarism would be “the act of using another person’s words or ideas without giving credit to that person” (Merriam-Webster, 2015). According to the student help website Plagiarism.org, sponsored by WriteCheck, plagiarism is often thought of as “copying another’s work or borrowing someone else’s original ideas” (“What is Plagiarism?” 2014). However, this source goes on to say that the common definition may mislead some people. Plagiarism also includes:

Turning in someone else’s work as your own
Copying words or ideas from someone else without giving credit
Failing to put quotation marks around an exact quotation correctly
Giving incorrect information about the source of a quotation
Changing words but copying the sentence structure of a source without giving credit
Copying so many words or ideas from a source that it makes up most of your work, whether you give credit or not

Plagiarism exists outside of the classroom and is a temptation in business, creative endeavors, and politics.

Types of Plagiarism

Generally, there are three types of plagiarism: direct, incorrect paraphrasing, and self-plagiarism. Sometimes these types of plagiarism are intentional, and sometimes they occur unintentionally (you may not know you’re plagiarizing). However, as everyone knows, “Ignorance of the law isn’t an excuse for breaking it.” Unintentional or accidental plagiarism is still plagiarism. Furthermore, the penalties for plagiarism are steep and it’s considered a serious act of misconduct. So, let’s familiarize you with how plagiarism occurs in order to prevent it from happening.

No one wants to be the victim of theft; if it has ever happened to you, you know how awful it feels. When a student takes an essay, research paper, speech, or outline completely from another source, whether it’s a classmate who submitted it for another instructor, from some sort of online essay mill, or from elsewhere, this is an act of theft. If you take a whole text and claim it’s yours, you are committing plagiarism; you are deliberately and directly lying about the authorship of a work. Even just lifting a short passage directly from a source without quoting it and using proper citation, is a form of stealing, thus plagiarism. You are committing plagiarism even if you delete or change a couple of words. If the structure and most of the words are the same as in the original, and you imply it’s your own work, this counts as direct plagiarism. If properly acknowledged and justified, it’s permissible to use verbatim short parts of another work, as discussed below.

Paraphrasing

Paraphrasing means taking someone else’s ideas and rephrasing them in your own words. There’s nothing wrong with rephrasing, in fact, it’s the basis of how we write and think. However, ethical writing (including speechwriting) means acknowledging the source of your ideas by citing or mentioning it. When you restate or summarize information from a source and don’t include a citation you are implying that those ideas came from you. Paraphrasing without citation is the most common form of plagiarism because it often happens unintentionally.

Another unethical, and more deliberate, form of incorrect paraphrasing is when you take two out of every three sentences and mix them up, so they don’t appear in the same order as in the original work. Perhaps the student will add a fresh introduction, a personal example or two, and an original conclusion.

Many students don’t see this as the same thing as stealing because they think “I did some research, I looked some stuff up, and I added some of my own work.” Yet this is only marginally better than direct plagiarism. Why? Because no source has been credited, and the student has “misappropriated” the expression of the ideas as well as the ideas themselves.

A similar sort of paraphrasing plagiarism involves copying passages from various sources and editing them together, mixed with some of your own words. If you do this and don’t correctly cite each source, it’s plagiarism. Furthermore, if your entire paper consists of predominantly the work of other authors that you have stitched together, whether you cite it or not, it’s plagiarism.

Self-Plagiarism

Some colleges and universities have a policy that penalizes or forbids “ self-plagiarism .” This means that you can’t use a paper or outline that you presented in another class a second time. You may think, “How can this be plagiarism or wrong if I wrote both and, in my work, I cited sources correctly?” The issue with re-using your own work is that you are not putting in the amount of effort expected for an assignment. One way to avoid self-plagiarism, particularly if your previous work is published, is to cite yourself. When in doubt, ask first.

Other Considerations

One area in speeches where students are not careful about citing is on their presentation slides. If a graphic or photo is borrowed from a website (that is, you did not design it), there should be a citation in small letters on the slide. The same would be true of borrowed quotations, data, and ideas. Students also like to put their “works cited” or “references” on the last slide, but this really does not help the audience to match particular images or material to the original source.

An issue that often comes up with students happens when two or more students submit the same assignment. When confronted, the student says, “We worked on it together.” If your instructor wants you to work collaboratively, they will make that clear. Otherwise, don’t do this. Always assume you are expected o turn in your own work. Any use of unauthorized assistance is considered cheating.

Finally, using AI technologies such as chat bots to produce the text of a speech is equivalent to turning in something written by someone else. While it may be permissible to use technology for editing grammar and spelling, you are the author and the idea you present should be the result of your own thinking. Unless stated otherwise in your instructor’s policy, using AI to write a speech constitutes plagiarism.

Avoiding Plagiarism

Avoiding plagiarism involves, first, the intention to create your own work. If you begin by assuming you can take other work and present it as your own, you will surely be in the realm of plagiarism. The second part of avoiding plagiarism is to learn the proper way to cite the sources you use. To “cite” means to provide the sources for your research, creating what is called a “citation.” Citations appear in written work, including essays and speeches, and on many websites, images, and more. Explaining exactly how to create citations for a written essay or research paper is outside the scope of this textbook. There are also free online tools that will generate proper citations for you. In this section and the one following it, we will focus on spoken citations as they appear in a speech—in other words, how to create a citation for listeners, not readers.

Avoiding Plagiarism with Direct Sources

As explained above, copying whole works from another source is plagiarism. But there are times when it’s appropriate to use a small amount of a source’s exact wording. You should have a good reason for inserting a direct quote. Typically, we quote when the source or author is highly respected, or they have stated the idea in a compelling way, or the material is well known, and others would recognize it. We also quote when we are discussing or analyzing a specific part of a text.

Whether you are using a phrase, a sentence, or even several sentences from another’s work, if you use exact words from a source, it requires quotation. Quoting tells the reader and listener that you are using the exact words from a source. The proper way to manage direct quotes in a speech text is to provide quotation marks at the beginning and end of the quote followed by a source citation. The most common citation is a parenthetical reference such as (Smith 12) where the author’s last name and the page number are written in parentheses following the quote. This parenthetical reference should correspond to a full citation in the bibliography. Alternatively, you can use a superscript number at the end of the quotation that corresponds to a full citation listed in footnotes/endnotes.

When using direct quotations, you should make it clear you’re quoting by the way in which you introduce and end the borrowed material, as in examples further below. A common practice in public speaking is to say quote and/or make air quotes to specify you are about to give a direct quote. It can also be beneficial to change your vocal tone and use appropriate gestures to help differentiate the quote from your own words.

Avoiding Plagiarism when Paraphrasing

As stated earlier, paraphrasing is common form of plagiarism because it often happens unintentionally. It’s important to understand what good paraphrasing is. Look at this example of an original source and three possible ways to paraphrase it.

Original information, posted on CNN.com website, October 31, 2015:

“The biggest federal inmate release on record will take place this weekend. About 6,600 inmates will be released, with 16,500 expected to get out the first year. More than 40,000 federal felons could be released early over the next several years, the U.S. Sentencing Commission said. The sentencing commission decided a year ago to lower maximum sentences for nonviolent drug offenders and to make the change retro-active, with the inmate releases effective November 1, 2015. Sentences were reduced an average of 18%, the commission said. Early release will be a challenge for the inmates as well as the judicial bureaucracy” (Casarez, 2015).

With that as the original source, which of the following three is truly paraphrasing?

The CNN News website says the federal government is releasing 40,000 felons from prison in the next few years.
According to a report posted on CNN’s website on October 31 of 2015, the federal government’s Sentencing Commission is beginning to release prisoners in November based on a decision made in 2014. That decision was to make maximum sentences for nonviolent drug offenders shorter by an average of 18%. Over the next several years over 40,000 federal felons could be let go. However, this policy change to early release will not be easy for the justice system or those released.
The largest release ever of federal inmates will take place in early November. At first 6,600 inmates will be released, and then over 16,000 over the first year. The U.S. Sentencing Commission says it could release over 40,000 federal felons over the upcoming years because the sentencing commission decided a year ago to lessen maximum sentences for nonviolent drug offenders and to make this happen for those already in jail. When the Sentencing Commission says that when it made that decision, the sentences were reduced by an average of 18%. Early release will be a challenge for the felons as well as the judicial system. This came from a story on CNN News website in later October 2015.

If you chose the second paraphrase, you would be correct. It uses different language and identifies the source of the information clearly at the beginning. The first version does not really interpret the original statement correctly, and the third choice imitates the original almost entirely. Neither of these two would be good paraphrasing.

Notice that each paraphrase example includes a citation that provides the source of the material, but only the second paraphrase does so completely: “According to a report posted on CNN’s website on October 31 of 2015 . . . “

There is a general rule of research that says that if the information you are using is “common knowledge”—dates and facts for example or other information a general reader should know—then it doesn’t need to be cited. A good rule of thumb is if the same information can be found in 4-5 sources where it was not cited, it’s common knowledge. But if it’s an original idea, research results, or the author’s interpretation of common facts then it needs to be cited. If you are in doubt whether you should cite something or not, always err on the side of caution. Over-citing is much better than the alternative: plagiarism.

Keep in mind good research takes time. Procrastinating leads to being unduly pressured to finish. This sort of pressure can lead to sloppy research habits and bad decisions. Make sure you give yourself plenty of time to complete your speech so it’s both ethical and well executed.

One way to avoid accidental plagiarism is to keep track of your citations as you are researching and writing. This prevents forgetting where a quotation came from or misattributing the source. Citation managers such as Zotero and Mendeley (which are free to download) not only keep track of all your sources while you research and write they can create instant bibliographies.

Creating Spoken Citations

Now that you understand using two forms of source material—direct quotation, and paraphrase—and you understand the importance of citing your sources to your audience, exactly how should you include a citation in a speech?

In a paper, you would only need to include a written citation such as “(Jones 78)” for a source that the reader can find in the bibliography. But it doesn’t work like for a speech. In a speech, saying “Jones, 78” doesn’t mean anything. Even saying “According to Jones, p. 78,” does little for the audience. Why? Because they can’t turn to a bibliography. They don’t have another way to understand the type of information being conveyed. In speeches it’s necessary, therefore, to give more complete information that would help the audience understand its value. This is why these are called spoken citations .

What information needs to be included in a spoken citation? The page number, the publishing company, and city it was published in are not very important. What is important is the type of source : for example, a website, scholarly article, newspaper article, or a book. Then, you should include when it was written, if possible, and the position, background, or credentials of the source. There are no fixed rules, however. In determining what should go into the verbal citation, think about the information that is necessary to clarify the relevance and credibility of your source for your audience and let that be your guide.

For example, instead of saying “According to Jones, p. 78,” a better approach would be,

According to Dr. Samuel Jones, Head of Cardiology at Vanderbilt University, in a 2010 article . . .

Whether you are introducing a direct quote or a paraphrase, you can see that it’s best to begin with the citation . Take these examples:

In her 2012 book, The Iraq War in Context, historian Mary Smith of the University of Georgia states that . . .

In consulting the website for the American Humane Society, I found these statistics about animal abuse compiled by the Society in 2023:

In the first example, you would insert a quote from Smith’s book after your spoken citation. In the second example, a paraphrase would be appropriate. For example:

In his 2014 book, Talk Like Ted, public speaking guru Carmine Gallo states that “Ideas are the currency of the twenty-first century.”

In consulting the website TED.org, I learned that the TED organization does much more than sponsoring TED talks. There are also podcasts, a video series, and television programs.

Sometimes when using direct quotes, speakers find it helpful to clarify where the quote begins and ends by saying the word “quote.” In that case, this is an example of exactly what a speaker would say:

In her 2023 memoir entitled Finding Me , the actor Viola Davis writes, quote, “I felt my call was to become an actress. It wasn’t. It was bigger than that. I was bigger than my successes.” End quote.

As mentioned above, a speaker can achieve the same effect by making a gesture of air quotes or changing the tone of the voice.

To conclude, citing your sources is immensely important. It shows that you have done proper research to support your ideas and arguments and it allows your audience to find the material if they want more information. Using clear citations makes your speech more credible to the audience.

This chapter introduced you to the ethics of public speaking and how being an ethical public speaker makes you a credible public speaker that audiences will trust. Using sources ethically means not only proper citation, but taking care that the information you use is relevant and presented in context. Avoid manipulating statistical information or taking a quotation from an expert in one field and present as if they are an expert in another field. Differentiate facts from opinions, especially when dealing with controversial subjects. In addition, be sure you understand the material you’re citing before using it. If you’re unsure of any words, look their definitions up so you’re sure to be using the material as it’s intended. Finally, it’s important that you understand the type of publication or source you’re using and any potential biases. It’s your responsibility to help the audience understand the reliability of a particular source, the purpose of including any cited information, and how it relates to your overarching argument.

Something to Think About

The following exercise might be helpful for you to develop an understanding of orally citing your sources.

Choose one of your sources for an upcoming speech for this exercise. On a sheet of paper, answer these questions.

Is this information you found in a unique source, or information that was repeated in all or most of your sources? (This may bear upon whether you need to cite the information or not.)
Who is the original author or “speaker” of this quotation or material? Are they an expert, such as a scientist, doctor, government official, college professor, etc.?
What is the title of source?
What do you know about the source of the citation? What is the medium (book, article, website)?
If a website, who sponsors the website (what organization, government, company)?
When was this information published? What is the date on it?

It’s not necessary to give all this information, but most of it should be included in the citation.

Stand up, Speak out: The Practice and Ethics of Public Speaking

(57 reviews)

Last Update: 2023

ISBN 13: 9781946135254

Publisher: University of Minnesota Libraries Publishing

Language: English

Formats Available

Conditions of use.

Learn more about reviews.

Reviewed by Patricia Walker, Associate Professor in Communication (Adjunct Professor), Prairie State College on 3/14/23

Comprehensiveness rating: 5 see less

"Stand up, Speak out: The Practice and Ethics of Public Speaking" is quite comprehensive. It covers all of the areas that are specific to my course. Moreover, it provides an instructor more substantive information and references from which to select and chose, if needed. For example, the breadth and depth of the open text has information on the following: the importance of public speaking, why public speaking matters, why ethics in public speaking is important, how to gain confidence while speaking, the importance of listening and the importance of knowing your audience. It further describes the purpose of public speaking, why research is critical, how speech organization is central to public speaking--(i.e., developing the introduction, body, and conclusion), the connection between language and delivery to a public speaking. Moreover, all the chapters have learning objectives, key takeaways for the chapters and their sections, brief exercises, pictures, charts and references--all of which enhance "Stand up, Speak out." Lastly, for each chapter, there is a quiz that covers the key ideas of the particular sections. I find this a good quick assessment the particular chapter.

Content Accuracy rating: 5

From my over 20 years teaching courses in communication, (especially in the area of Introduction to Communication and/or Public Speaking), this open textbook has accurate content--free from error and is unbiased. As stated in the previous section, each chapter has references for users to gain additional information for further documentation. The references of each chapter reinforce its accuracy and information.

Relevance/Longevity rating: 5

Each chapter is up-to-date and relevant. This open textbook, though copyrighted in 2016, still has useful information. Professors can assign sections that are relevant to their course objectives. For example, let's use Chapter 7 on how to conduct research for a speech. The chapter has information that can be utilized or not--the instructor determines the range of information to use. From my experience, students often struggle with how to do "good" research. Lastly, Chapter 7 discusses what is research, how to use different research tools, how to cite sources and how to avoid plagarism. It also provides ethical ways how to support the speaker's ideas by supporting the instructor's lecture, the research librarian's lecture and/or research workshop, and by building credibility that fortifies the speaker's ideas--the criteria for an effective speech.

Clarity rating: 5

The textbook's ideas are lucid, clear, and provides adequate context to the terminology.

Consistency rating: 5

As stated earlier, the open textbook is quite consistent. What I mean by consistency is that each chapter has learning objectives, charts and pictures that explain the content. Likewise, each chapter has key takeaways and questions that cover the main items. Also, the chapter has a quiz that covers the major ideas of each chapter. It reinforces how a speech should be developed--i.e., having a well-developed introduction, body, and conclusion that reinforce how an oral presentation should be constructed and delivered. Undoubtedly, I especially like the "consistency" of the open tex.tbook because of its organization and fluidity.

Modularity rating: 5

The open textbook has divisible smaller reading sections that reinforce the major ideas and/or key concepts of the chapter; this describes "modularity." I am drawn to this online textbook because if offers additional information that I have cited during lecture; and even if I am using another textbook, some of the chapter sections provide a different perspective and/or reinforces the textbook that I am currently using, thereby helping to achieve a sense of "flow."

Organization/Structure/Flow rating: 5

The open text is highly organized, which I have previously mentioned in my critical analysis of "Stand up, Speak out." Whether the instructor is a veteran or a novice in the art and skill of teaching public speaking, this open textbook is highly effective and can be streamlined to fit the instructor's goals and/or course objectives.

Interface rating: 5

Frankly, this open text is clear and free of significant interface issues. There are no distractions that would confuse the reader. I have looked over other open textbooks and found this one best meets my pedagogical needs. Furthemore, I am really drawn to the images, images, charts, and pictures that reinforce and/or complement the ideas in "Speak up, Speak out."

Grammatical Errors rating: 5

The textbook is error free, well written, and highly organized.

Cultural Relevance rating: 5

The text is not offensive to its users. As stated earlier, there are various content-related questions that allow users of the textbook an opportunity to select responses that are related to their cultural interests and ideas.

I highly recommend "Stand Up and Speak Out--The Practice and Ethics of Public Speaking" as textbook for two basic reasons: (1) it can be used as a standalone textbook; (2) it can also be used as a possible supplement to the instructor's communication textbook. Lastly, even though the textbook is lengthy, this free open text gives confidence for any individual who desires to be an effective communicator in any public setting.

Reviewed by Christopher Anderson, Adjunct Faculty, Bristol Community College on 6/21/21

The chapters cover what you hope and expect from an introductory level public speaking textbook. read more

The chapters cover what you hope and expect from an introductory level public speaking textbook.

Content Accuracy rating: 4

The content is accurate, but sometimes ignores the historical birth of the ideas in favor of more recent discussions. While this approach will work well for most avenues of student, students in communication majors would benefit from additional nods to early scholars such as Quintillian, Ciscero, and Aristotle.

Relevance/Longevity rating: 4

For the most part this text holds up well across each chapter with the possible exemption of chapter 15 concerning presentation aids. The rapidly changing landscape of visual aids makes chapters on them, in any level of communication textbook, difficult to keep relevant. The good news is that anyone choosing to adapt this book for their own course can choose to update this chapter or omit it as they see fit.

The points in each chapter are accessible to introductory scholars. The book may be slightly tedious in upper level courses, but this is clearly a fundamental course book and should only be used as such.

I would need a few semesters of working with the book to be certain, but it does not seem to contradict itself after my first viewing.

Modularity rating: 3

The variety of visuals is both a benefit and a potential issue. Students today are often more prone to need a consistent approach to layouts. The chapters themselves are consistent in their format, but the variety of visual aids could be problematic for some students.

The chapters are organized as you would expect to see in a book used for a 15 week semester. The real strength of the book's organization lies within the way each chapter is laid out in sub-points. A clever instructor might even point this out to their students to push the idea of how well topic organizational patterns work in public speaking.

The variety of ways in which to engage with the book is wonderful, and there seem to be no interface issues with any of them.

The book is well written.

Cultural Relevance rating: 4

The book's relevance to culture is simplistic, but effective. For anyone adapting this ebook to their own course, a course director could easily add ideas endemic to their local community in a way that would make great sense to their students. Otherwise, the need for specific instances of cultural relevance are less necessary that other items.

Reviewed by Caleb Lamont, Adjunct Faculty in Communication Studies, Eastern Oregon University on 6/13/21

This text covers a wide range of topics, all of which are important for students to be aware of for a public speaking text. I especially liked the section on ethical public speaking, as a lot of other public speaking texts do not touch on this. Content wise, this text really covered everything there is to know about public speaking I feel. While I did feel that some topics could have been given their own entire chapter though, all the major concepts were still touched on. The only additions could be an index and glossary.

There is no author biases, this was a well written text and had no errors in what was being presented.

Everything is relevant today, and will likely continue to be for some time before edits need to be made. Even when that happens, the overall content will still be accurate, it will only need to be more modernized.

Everything presented in this text is very easy to understand and easy to follow.

Each chapter pretty much follows the same format and flow, and has information divided into sections. Following the same format/structure from chapter to chapter prevents surprises so students know exactly what to expect.

Information is divided into sections, and smaller 'chunks' so it makes reading chapters more bearable and allows students the opportunity to stop reading and pick up right where they left off easily without missing anything that is being presented to them.

Everything is well organized throughout, chapters flow clearly and logically.

Solid all around.

I found no errors of any kind.

For the type of class that this text is for, it did a fine job here and was not insensitive or offensive.

Solid textbook all around and introduces students to public speaking in highly effective ways.

Reviewed by Emily Wilkinson Stallings, Faculty Member - Senior Instructor, Virginia Tech on 5/19/21

This textbook has the classic coverage of most Public Speaking textbooks today with an emphasis on ethics. I do see that cultural identities are missing which would be important when considering the audience (although the demographic information in the audience chapter is covered quite well). And there is a very brief overview of culture on page 26. Also on page 107 there is a discussion of the diversity found in audiences.

There is a bibliography at the end of each section in the chapters - this is nice in demonstrating the accuracy of materials., e.g. credible sources. In chapter 1, section 1.2 under Models of P.S., I am disappointed that the 3 models shown are not detailed enough for me - I will add materials to enhance the understanding of how these models work in relation to P.S. Chapter 2 on ethics is excellent, covered well. Go to Interface (below) for comments on being unbiased. - I took Accuracy to mean something different, accuracy of the material.

This book, along with all P.S. books will be around forever. I do think when & if revised, there needs to be attention to cultural considerations and to replace some of the illustrations - they seem dated.

Clarity rating: 4

The content borders on information overload. Dense is the word I would use. Some long paragraphs, a lot of text. However, the Learning Objectives, Key Takeaways, Exercises, End of the Chapter Assessments help the student pull the main ideas that helps with organizing and remembering material in their minds. I also like the use of headings and the use of bold for key words.

There is consistency in the layout of this text. Each chapter is divided into sections. Each section is clearly labeled and begins with Learning Objectives and ends with Key Takeaways, Exercises, and a bibliography (references). All parts of each section have clear labeling all the way through the chapter. There is an ethical box connecting the material of that chapter to ethic at the end of each chapter and an end-of-chapter assessment with answer key (wish it didn't have that or the key was placed at the end of the text).

As I commented above, yes the material is 'readily divisible into smaller reading sections'. From my view this is well-done by the author. I notice a worksheet at the end of Chapter 9, which is positive for students as they work through their introduction to a speech.

As commented above, the organization is excellent. Students could easily create an outline from the structure on the chapters. Chapters and Sections are logically ordered with consideration to the steps in developing a speech. The only chapter that I personally would move earlier in the book, is Chapter 13 on language. I do understand the reasoning of the author's placement. After writing your outline for the speech, you could then consider language, so the placement can make sense. Personal viewpoint.

Interface rating: 3

Interface is good. As I look at pictures, they tend to be of older white men - I do not prefer this as I think it s not a good representation of the population of our country. Little inclusion of women or people of color. (oops, I am incorrect there is a picture of a woman of color on page 250) On page 199 there is a picture of a bibliography that looks distorted [a simple copy from a copy machine] and overwhelming. Being overwhelming was the purpose , I believe. In one area I saw a reference to the Bible used as an example. I have no problem with this, if other religious texts are also utilized - I have not seen that included.

I have not detected any grammatical or spelling errors. Upon use of the textbook, they would show up more readily if there.

Cultural Relevance rating: 2

As I've already stated, this is an area that needs work in this textbook.

I am looking forward to trying out this textbook in my public speaking class this summer. I am concerned with the density of the book, simply information overload [again, this is my perception].

Reviewed by Jeff Wade, Instructor, Northeastern Illinois University on 5/11/21

Comprehensiveness rating: 4 see less

The work is well sourced, and covers most aspects of public speaking with thoroughness. However, it is without a glossary or index. The chapters are well laid however, and the "Key Takeaways" and "Exercises" at the end of each sections provides clarity. I found the approach to speech anxiety (Ch. 3) especially enlightened. Anxiety is not a one-size fits all; and embracing the uniqueness of individual skill sets is the key for success. Lacking in this book's treatment is even a cursory discussion to the physiology of the voice and vocal production. Admittedly, a course in Voice and Diction is more appropriate for a thorough examination of these techniques. So to that extent, this omission is somewhat understandable. Still, it is surprising that basic physiology (the diaphragm, Larynx, etc.) and its relevance toward the production of full resonance is ignored.

The book is dispassionate in its examination of passionate topics and difficult techniques. Further, it places the material in the proper context(s). I found no errors. All the links in the text seemed to work as well.

Without dwelling on the up-to-the-minute trends in mass media, for example, this book effectively presents timeless content with some basic modern thinking. For example, its focus on ethics is well presented early in the text (Ch. 2). Its use of the Credo for Ethical Communication is an important way to start the critical thinking process. There is a sensitivity to modern nuances and perceptions in this book, which allows the students to critically examine their goals, and those if their audiences.

The prose of this public speaking book is consistently basic, without being vague or boiler plate. Even its approach to "drier" topics such as research and outlining are easily accessible.

The framework for topics and issues presented in this text is one of its best features. Topics are laid out before hand and thoroughly recapped. I found the students came to rely on this consistency to help them absorb material ranging from research techniques to subjective speaking styles.

Another attribute of "Stand Up, Speak Out" is its organization. Like public speaking itself, there is no one particular order to present material. This book allows the instructor the freedom to effectively "jump around" the text as needed. There is no confusion in this, as again, the text is reliably consistent in its presentation. For example, many of the later chapters on giving specific speeches could be sewn into the course as "speech units" as each technique is covered.

While not containing a glossary or index, Stand Up, Speak Out is dependably clear. It relies on basic prose to break down complicated concepts. The best example of this is from Chapter 13 on language, which might be described as a slightly more detailed glossary. The students embrace this fundamental delivery of key terms.

This text could not have been more easy to use.

No grammatical or editorial errors were found.

Cultural Relevance rating: 3

The book might have incorporated a more diverse and expansive look into things like "Stages of Listening," for example (Ch. 4). Is there one way to hear and listen? To whom are we, as a society, not listening? The book addresses the difference between hearing and listening, but seems to miss the most obvious metaphor for it. In fact, this treatment lacks depth in general, regardless of context. In this case, the plain basic approach of the text does not seem to measure up to the topic.

The book was remarkably easy to use and to navigate. Students found its consistency its best feature.

Reviewed by Christy Takamure, Professor, Leeward Community College on 4/23/21

The textbook covers the major components you will find in other public speaking texts. Links connect the reader to more information if they are interested in specific examples. Although the concepts are clearly defined, there is room for more discussion on broader communication concepts, more specifically, in the persuasion and language use chapters. The information can be supplemented with other resources. There is no index and/or glossary.

The textbook is written clearly and with no biases. The authors did a thorough job in citing sources throughout. The APA and MLA guidelines were to date with good examples.

The information presented is relevant and can be continued for long-term use. Adding information about presenting speeches digitally will bring this textbook up-to-date especially now when much of the teaching and learning is remote and online.

The writing style is accessible and easy to follow and understand. Examples are provided to add clarity.

I like how the textbook is consistently formatted which allows the reader to know what to expect in each chapter. It is also worded clearly and concisely.

This textbook is easily divided so the different sections can be utilized out of sequence if needed. It allows flexibility to rearrange or add supplemental information whenever needed.

The textbook is well-organized and clearly formatted. The consistent structure of the contents makes it easy to read. The smooth flow of the textbook begins each chapter with an overview and then leads to each section with Learning Objectives to help identify the key points. Finally, each section ends with “Key Takeaways”. “Exercises” and end-of-chapter assessments are available to reinforce learning.

Although the organization of the textbook is clear, it would be helpful to add an index and bibliography so that the reader can find information easier. I would have liked to see more illustrations and photographs which adds interest and appeal.

I did not find any significant grammatical or mechanical errors.

The illustrations displayed cultural diversity with various ethnicities, races, and backgrounds represented. It would have been ideal to include a discussion on cultural relevance whenever it deemed appropriate to expand how culture may influence the communication process. This inclusion would be more appealing to the population at my campus which includes many minority groups.

Overall, I believe that this textbook does a great job on covering the major components of public speaking. It is highly suitable for an introductory public speaking course.

Reviewed by Daniela Ottati-Reperger, Adjunct Assistant Professor, New York City College of Technology on 3/22/21

The text has a table of contents that lists its 18 chapters. In addition, all chapters contain information that perfectly falls under the umbrella of public speaking. I would have liked to see additional chapters on nonverbal communication and... read more

The content presented is accurate and unbiased.

The content covers the fundamentals of public speaking, and it will, therefore, not become obsolete within a short period of time. The text allows for updates to be made.

The text is very easy to follow and understand.

There is consistency in how the text and other elements are presented to readers. There are “learning objectives” at the beginning of a section while “key takeaways” and “exercises” show at the end of each section. Chapter exercises and end-of-chapter assessments are also provided.

The chapters are divided into sections; this makes the content easy to use in case select chapter sections are assigned. There are headings used throughout the text that facilitate the identification of the topics covered.

The information from the text is presented in a logical way that still allows professors to rearrange how they prefer to present the material to learners.

Interface rating: 4

There is a combination of images and graphics throughout the text. The graphics are of a good quality while the image selection process could improve (see 2.1 drawing and 2.2 black and white picture, for example).

The text does not contain major errors.

The text is not culturally insensitive or offensive. It includes discussions regarding diversity and what to do to make sure audiences are not offended. As mentioned before, the text could have benefited from having a stand-alone intercultural communication chapter.

This textbook can be perfectly used in a public speaking course. It is important to always highlight the role of the professor who will be able to choose how to use it and how to fill in any gaps.

Reviewed by Lisa Merritt, Adjunct Instructor, Central Oregon Community College on 1/14/21

The text is well organized and follows a logical progression. As others have stated, a much-needed Ethics chapter is located prominently at the front of the book as chapter two. All the traditional items one would expect to find in a public speaking text is present. However, given the dramatic changes brought about in 2020 it would be useful to have information on best practices of remote delivery.

The is brief contents is easy to read and well organized. There is not a detailed Table of Contents. It’s not really a problem, but simply an observation. The book is also missing a glossary. Again, not really a problem given that one can easily do an electronic search of the document instead.

The book reads well and includes relatively current pictures and examples. The writing is unbiased and inclusive. The content is accurate with useful examples.

The text is arranged in a logical progression and can easily be updated.

The book follows its own recommendation on clarity (page 105) by "using words that your audience will understand." While the standard pedagogy is clear and correct, the book is written in a colloquial manner. It keeps the information from being intimating or more difficult than it needs to be for an introductory course. It's an enjoyable read.

There is visual consistency with how the chapters are arranged and presented. There is also consistency in tone and language.

Reading through the book is pleasurable. The information is chunked into short sections with clearly stated learning objectives. While it does make for many pages, I appreciate the spacing and headings. It's visually pleasing and easy to find concepts that one may be perusing to find.

While the text is presented in a logical and progressive manner, that doesn't mean one can't easily teach the chapters "our of order" so to speak. For example, I prefer to explain the body of the speech before elaborating on how to develop a tailored introduction and conclusion. Thus I teach "out of order" from the book chapters that proceed from Ch. 9: Introductions Matter; to Ch. 10: Creating the Body of the Speech and finally; Ch. 11: Concluding with Power. Nonetheless, the order of the book makes sense and is very practical.

There are no interface errors that I have noticed. The spacing and allowable white space helps keep this text reader friendly and visually appealing.

There don't appear to be any grammatical errors. This is a very professionally developed book.

The inherent nature of quality public speaking requires the discussion and inclusion of cultural elements and current practices. This book does a nice job of addressing these concerns. For example, Chapter 2: Ethics in Public Speaking includes the NCA Credo to Public Speaking which helps set the tone and expectation for inclusiveness and cultural appreciation throughout the text. To be clear, it's not an "intercultural" textbook. But it does address the very basics in regards to helping beginning speakers as they build awareness and understanding of audience analysis. No small task!

Having taught out Lucas' "The Art of Public Speaking" for two decades, I find Stand up, Speak out to be a nice alternative. The chapters follow almost the same sequence and information is as comprehensive making it a relatively easy switch for me. This sounds selfish in a way, but that can be a big challenge when trying to find an OER. It's nice when you can adopt an OER and not have to completely rework your course!

Reviewed by Michelle Scaman, Term Faculty, University of Alaska Anchorage on 1/7/21, updated 1/10/21

The textbook addresses the basic concepts of public speaking within a scope that is appropriate for 100 and 200 level courses and provides clear examples as well as useful exercises. One notable feature is the appendix which provides prompts that allow for synthesizing the knowledge gained within the chapters by assisting students with their first speech. I do wish that the textbook included more information on rhetorical appeals as well as a discussion on logical fallacies but overall, it provides a solid foundation for learning public speaking.

Theories and models are cited clearly and introduced in a logical manner. Communication scholars are referenced and applied appropriately.

The examples within each chapter help to clarify the concepts introduced but are mostly broad enough that they don't seem dated. The more specific examples that were current at the date of publication, could easily be updated.

Public speaking terminology is clearly defined with examples to reinforce concepts.

Each chapter and section featured learning objectives, concepts, terminology, examples, and key takeaways consistently.

Chapter sections are divided into concepts incrementally, making them easy to align with assignments. The learning objectives are easily identifiable within the subsections.

The textbook is clearly organized with each chapter transitioning smoothly to the next. The foundation and framework for the text are established in a logical manner that scaffolds information in an accessible manner. There are clear learning objectives and key takeaways.

The textbook is easy to navigate and images and charts were legible. This was appropriately evident in the 'Visual Aid" section as the example charts and images could be understood clearly.

I did not encounter grammatical errors while reviewing this textbook.

Most textbooks fall short in this area of cultural competence. While the language was inclusive and some examples referenced culture, there is room for growth.

Reviewed by Karen Pleasant, Adjunct Instructor, Rogue Community College on 8/25/20

The text effectively covers the basics of Public Speaking, but it lacks both a glossary and information about fallacies. I liked the chart (a student exericse) about ethical issues as well as the comprehensive chapters on Communication... read more

I didn't notice any errors in the book and the information was presented in an unbiased way to all students with references to "us" and "you."

The information contained in the book is up-to-date. Each chapter is organized with learning objectives and followed up with exercises and end-of-chapter assessments, so students know the relevance of the information presented and can they assess the knowledge they gained at the end.

Easy to read and the use of supporting illustrations and other visuals was very helpful to get the information across to readers.

Yes, but a glossary would be helpful.

Chapters could be utilized in any order as needed by the instructor.

The text logically follows the steps inherent in preparing and delivering a speech.

The interface is fine and the images are clear and easy to read.

I didn't notice any grammatical errors.

The use of language chapter addresses gender and ethnicity and more information about using inclusive language.

While the text covers the basics of public speaking, I have looked at other OER Public Speaking oriented textbooks that are more appealing and user friendly to me. I would like to see the inclusion of a chapter about fallacies, although I could add supplemental materials myself to cover the missing information.

Reviewed by Shelly Grady, Adjunct Communication Instructor, Community College of Aurora on 8/14/20

The big concern for me was that there was a brief mention of ethos, but no mention of pathos or logos, and little to no discussion of fallacy. These are vital components of the persuasive speech process, so I was looking for further detail. The information on PSA is a great start, but it doesn't speak to pinpointing the onset of anxiety prior to the speech act, which is something I always try to address.

On the other hand, I found the text to be very comprehensive in regards to building the speech introduction, body, and conclusion, as well as in addressing outlining and resources. The analysis tools will be very helpful for students, and the charts do an excellent job of illustrating options.

The content is error free, and for the most part it is not biased. I did find some contradictions in how gender is represented that could be viewed as biased. In the beginning, there is a clear warning against heterosexism, but the next time the author speaks to gender it is presented as binary. The author specifically warns against this in the section on using language appropriately, but the gender section itself doesn't acknowledge non-binary people.

The most recent example is from 2011, which in itself is not a concern. However, there are a number of places where the examples are identified as being recent, which can make the book seem somewhat outdated. The biggest concern here is that some of the links are no longer viable. Of these, some will redirect you, but the majority give an "oops, this page doesn't exist" style of warning. There are also a few links, such as the one for VSOTD, that require users to pay to access the referenced information. It is clear in the text which sites would incur a fee at the time it was published, but be sure to check the links now and update them as needed.

The book does a phenomenal job of breaking down the terms and making them easily understood. There are a number of communication theories addressed throughout, and the supporting examples do an excellent job of illustrating these. Each time a new term is introduced, the definition and supporting examples are offered.

The Speaking Ethically sections do an excellent job of continuing the importance of ethics throughout the entire text. The book does a good job of scaffolding concepts throughout and calling back to previous chapters to build further upon presented information. The only lack of consistency was the previously noted contradiction in how gender is addressed in a binary way in some places but as non-binary in others.

I appreciate that each chapter is broken into subsections, which will make it easy for me to pick and choose which pieces I want and assign them in a different order. The Key Take Aways, Exercises, and Speaking Ethically sections were particularly valuable, and did an excellent job of breaking down the sections in accessible pieces.

Organization/Structure/Flow rating: 4

The text is set up in such a way that you should ideally read all the way through prior to presenting. While this is common among public speaking texts, I do not think it is realistic for the classroom. You will need to rearrange the content unless you are planning to have your students present all of their speeches in the final weeks of the term. Outside of this, it is organized in much the same way that a speech is developed, which is ideal.

There were a few places where the print appeared to be cut off or a smaller size font at the bottom of the page, but this was very minor. The exercises are listed all numerically, but the answer key provides the letter for the correct response, which can be a bit confusing. Some of the links to external websites are broken, but the majority worked as intended.

No grammatical errors found.

While I did not find any examples that were offensive, I did not see any representation of non-binary gender. Outside of that, I thought the used examples did an excellent job of incorporating a variety of names. The text also did a good job of addressing the importance of inclusiveness, specifically in language choice and topic selection, as both a speaker and listener.

I will definitely be using large portions of this text in my class moving forward! I really liked how in depth the discussion was in regards to the introduction, conclusion, and transitions, and I will be using the worksheets provided throughout for my students. Many of the reference database websites were still live links, but be sure to check every link to see if it is active and whether or not it will charge, as some of them now do. You will need to find additional resources on the pillars of persuasion and fallacy in arguments, but in the basic construction a speech, the different speech types, and overall presentation, this book is a fabulous resource! As promised, it really focuses on ethics throughout the text, and the exercises at the end of each chapter should be excellent conversation starters for class discussion. One of my favorite aspects of this text is that it focuses on public speaking as both presenter and audience, which many other texts have lacked in my opinion.

Reviewed by Lucy McKain, Adjunct Professor, Middlesex Community College on 6/30/20

I thought this book covers most of the basics of writing and delivering a speech topic. I was disappointed however that it does not go into how to write a specific objective or purpose and why that is so important in your thinking and planning before the speech. I have found students have a difficult time adapting topics to different audiences. So practice with this is critical to meeting the audiences needs as well as the speechwriters.

I think the many examples and topic comments are helpful to the learner.

Yes the images and illustrations are interesting and well done too.

The text is written clearly and is easy to follow.

The overall design and framework is consistent.

The text modularity would not present any disruption to the reader.

Text organization is clear and logical.

The interface is clear and free of distractions.

There are no grammatical issues of concern.

This text is culturally relevant.

I was hoping to find a linear diagram or model of the process of speech writing. I believe a graphic model for some students, helps to solidify the concepts with an image that is easily recalled.

Reviewed by Constance Berman, Professor of Communication, Berkshire Community College on 6/29/20

Quite comprehensive - including a chapter on the so important but often neglected topic on LISTENING; all parts of a speech structure covered well - intro; body; conclusion. Types - informational, persuasive, entertainment. Keeping learning objectives clear and then following up in sections is thoughtful. The only section I would recommend be updated is the Visual Aids - needs to be more complete on using Power Point and examples and structural and delivery guidelines. I am sure there is an index but my reading version did not show it.

The text is quite accurate - especially in considering various modes of delivery and purpose. The chapters on research are quite up to date and long reaching

The fundamentals of public speaking do not change - book definitely follows the "canon" of the course with examples that are relevant but not tied to current specifics.

Would be very clear for first and second year college students. Serious approach with an ear for what kinds of questions students might have - especially in the chapter on dealing with speech anxiety and debunking myths about nervousness and solutions to this pervasive problem.

Very well organized with theory, practice, learning objectives and exercises and wrap-up for each section.

Easy to find topic subheadings - could be used by the instructor as a resource for different topics and does not need to be used chronologically. Can be a good resource.

Clear on organization - why and how the student can proceed. Sub-section headings are very helpful.

Some good illustrations - although could use more - do not seem to have navigation problems.

Certainly written well with good examples that students can follow - asks good questions and then answers them. Includes a section on humor which is down to earth and respectful and inclusive.

Quite inclusive with a section on what inclusive means when you are speaking in public and furthermore, what it means to be "ethical" - in each chapter - and how to use sensitivity towards the speaker's audience. Good examples of knowing the audience and ways to show that you respect the audience.

When compared to the industry giant - Lucas' work - this open source book is a very good alternative. On Persuasive Speaking - there might be a little more psychological presentation on what moves people and why people do not embrace certain ideas even if presented with great evidence - How to breach this barrier might be interesting to students in today's divisive climate. I like the Appendices - gives a further look on some topics - short and easy to follow for students.

Reviewed by Stef Donev, Adjunct Faculty, Worcester State University on 6/21/20

In a time when people routinely talk about “fake news” and “alternative facts” and news agencies such as the Associated Press, CBS, NBC, etc., regularly run “fact checks” on speeches and announcements by politicians, government agencies, large corporations and organizations, the book’s stress on the ethics of public speaking is a welcome addition to the long list of public speaking textbooks. It does this quite well, and clearly and concisely, without detracting from any of the other essential elements of public speaking. The book also covers all the components of the speech-creation process, from generating topics and audience analysis to writing, the use of humor, and delivery. While it does not provide a glossary of terms or index, its table of contents lets students know exactly what each chapter and section deals with.

The book covers all aspects of speech preparation, writing, and delivery and does so accurately and professionally. It also includes samples and guidance for the standard range of speech types. As an added bonus, the book also offers good examples and advice on using humor in speeches, when and where to use it, good sources of it, how to let it develop and flow organically from the speaker’s topic and research, and how to find the right types of humor for different speeches and audiences.

The only real change in the craft of public speaking over the centuries has been the technology used to deliver it and make it more aurally and visually stimulating. Even though this technology keeps changing, the book offers a look at how to use current technology, covering everything from handouts, chalk board, and flip charts to maps, Power Point, and audio and video clips. If new technology is developed it would be easy to add it without disturbing the flow or structure of the book.

Like a good speech, the book is written clearly and simply. It is easy to follow and tailored to its audience. Even though it does not provide an actual glossary, it does explain the technical terms it uses.

The book follows the standard pattern of other public speaking books, hits the same major points that the rest do, and does so with a bit more flair than many others.

The text is broken down into simple and clear bite-sized chunks, appropriate for people who tend to spend more time reading computer screens than books. The various sections, or modules, are distinctive and the explanations simple and focused.

The use of Learning Objective boxes at the start of each section let students know what is important in the upcoming sections, and the Key Takeways boxes at the end give them a chance to review and make sure they understand the points of what they have just read. It also includes exercises that can be used to test their actual understanding of the material. As with most of the speech books I’ve used over the years, explanations, examples, and advice about various types of speeches are at the end of the book even though students will be standing up and speaking long before they go through all the chapters with the information they need to do those speeches well. This means a certain amount of jumping around. It is awkward and confusing, but so is developing the skills to be a good public speaker.

The book is easy to navigate, and the paging and art are consistent in the various formats, but, like all books with digital links, there is always the danger of web addresses and URLs vanishing over time.

A grammarian might quibble over some of the comma placements and the usage of the occasional semicolons, but the text contains no grammatical errors.

The text talks about culture, cocultures, and subcultures and the importance of recognizing them and dealing with them intelligently and respectfully. It covers the various conditions which shape culture: age, gender, ethnicity, education, group membership, occupation, etc., especially in terms of audience analysis and shaping speeches to fit a specific audience.

Ethics is the second chapter of the book. Since there are times when teachers fail to get all the way through an entire textbook in a class, it is good that it is dealt with up-front, which helps ensure that it is part of every speech the students give. I will use this book the next time I teach Public Speaking.

Reviewed by Patrick Bartee, Professor of Speech, Valencia College on 6/8/20

In my personal opinion, the book covers the major steps of effective public speaking tips. read more

In my personal opinion, the book covers the major steps of effective public speaking tips.

I pulled this statement from the books information. Stand up, Speak out: The Practice and Ethics of Public Speakingfeatures two key themes. First it focuses on helping students become more seasoned and polished public speakers, and second is its emphasis on ethics in communication. It is this practical approach and integrated ethical coverage that setsStand up, Speak out: The Practice and Ethics of Public Speakingapart from the other texts in this market.

This text is very straightforward and totally up to date.

The reading is very clear and very easy to understand.

It is totally on point with consistency.

This text has everything necessary to help a student understand the flow and steps to effective public speaking.

The structure and flow worked well in my personal opinion.

There is nothing confusing in the reading and understanding in my opinion.

I didn't find any grammatical errors in the text.

It appears to be inline with cultural insensitivity.

No thank you. The text appears to be inline with methods of the learning pedagogy. I believe that a student would be able to follow the step-by-step style and flow of this text.

Reviewed by Sherri Raftery-Patton, Adjunct Faculty, North Shore Community College on 5/27/20

Stand up, Speak out: The Practice and Ethics of Public Speaking is a practical, comprehensive and complete guide to learn the tools of public speaking. I highly recommend this book, every chapter is valuable, easy to understand, and questions at... read more

The accuracy of this book is on point to the world of public speaking, communicating, and presenting, especially for beginners and those who want to review and rehearse their skills.

The relevance of this book is up to date. Perhaps offering ZOOM and online speaking options in our new age of virtual learning.

This book offers clarity, the words are easy and fluid to understand, and the technical terminology is appropriate.

The flow and consistency worked and their were references to previous chapters and sections, that were helpful to go back and review.

I think the modularity worked well for this text and this subject matter.

Personally, for my courses, I would like to see these topics sooner in the text rather than later, especially the informative and persuasive speaking because those are required and having students review those early in the semester would be beneficial. Chapter 16: Informative Speaking Chapter 17: Persuasive Speaking Chapter 18: Speaking to Entertain

The interface was easily manageable, perfect for online learning courses. The use of charts, graphs, photos were complimentary to the particular topic.

Grammar was appropriate, nothing real stood out.

I found this book to be inclusive, offering cultural differences, and other races, gender identities, and ethnicities certainly adds more welcoming value to a wider audience. Variety of photos and speakers helps all students to feel inclusive and identified.

This is an excellent resource for students who are starting to learn public speaking and presentation skills. The content is worthy and I appreciate how easily and accessible it is. One comment I would recommend is to make it clearer with a button that says either "open" or "access" book here because it is not clear initially how to open the link. As a professor, I highly recommend Stand up, Speak out: The Practice and Ethics of Public Speaking. Students will become more confident and knowledgeable by the end of the semester with the help of this text book!

Reviewed by Alyssa Harter, Assistant Professor , Umpqua Community College on 12/16/19

The textbook is very comprehensive in covering relative topics to Public Speaking in an effective manner. The authors provide an index and glossary, in addition to an embedded table of contents to navigate the text. read more

Free of errors and very unbiased.

The book is relevant and echos the tried and true conversations within Public Speaking for decades!

Any technical terminology is defined using clear definitions and bold font to clarify subject specific terms and concepts.

Yes, consistency is clear.

The text is divided into smaller sections, in addition to being quickly navigated from the Table of Contents based on the smaller sections within a larger chapter.

I was a major fan of there being larger sections/progressions in speech making. Examples: Topic Selection/Research, Organizing the Speech, Delivering the Speech, and Speech Types. Most Public Speaking textbooks are organized in this manner, which is how logical public speaking courses progress.

The text lacks interface issues. However, the authors should constantly check the embedded links to videos to verify the owner of those videos do not remove/alter them in any way.

No grammatical errors

One comment that I received from a student in my Public Speaking class using this textbook is that Ceremonial Speeches listed in Chapter 18 are Anglo-American. This student made note that most of the speeches listed talked about American custom, with little note of how other cultures would approach a speech such as a eulogy. Reviewing the text for myself, I agree with the sentiments this student posed.

Stand up, Speak out is a comprehensive and relevant textbook to adopt in the Public Speaking classroom. The content is easy to use and navigate for students and educators alike! I appreciate the chapter exercises, examples, and charts embedded within the text for students to refer to. Having used various public speaking textbooks, this one ranks highly among other well-revered authors and textbooks within our discipline.

Reviewed by William Bettler, Professor, Hanover College on 10/22/19

As an experiment, I used this text alongside another general public speaking text in my introductory public speaking class. I consistently found that while the two texts had more similarity than difference, this text had extras. For example, while both texts covered genres of speaking, rhetorical concepts/terms, presentation/visual aids, audience analysis, etc. this text had the extra dimension of integrating ethical considerations into each topic (and this is no small thing--this is a substantive difference). Further, the chapter exercises at the end of each chapter were useful to my students.

This particular criterion doesn't apply as much to a public speaking text--it's hard to label something as "accurate" in the context of public speaking pedagogy. Public speaking texts tend to be collections of "best practices," and this text is an especially useful one. I particularly appreciated the chapters on Introductions and Conclusions, which are very detailed and could have easily been mentioned above in my response about "comprehensiveness." In terms of bias, the authors of this text do an excellent job of side-stepping some common pitfalls. For example, the chapter on presentation aids has an example from the Chinese alphabet, avoiding any hint of ethnocentrism.

Staying relevant is a real challenge for public speaking texts. With its emphasis on best practices, an effective speaking text is expected to encompass the history of public address, from the Ancient Greeks to the present day. Consequently, a chapter on Presentation Aids, is particularly challenging to write. This text is laudatory in its attempt to blend timeless wisdom (e.g. clarity and understanding are key goals of using presentation aids) with more timely observations, such as which type of software to use to make audience-grabbing graphics. Table 15.1 in section 15.3 is going to be quite useful to students, as it not only identifies the most popular software packages, but also contains links that enable students to download or purchase the software. While this sort of content is, by nature, time-sensitive, it represents a strength of this text.

This books is accessible and easy to read. It contains a fair amount of specialized language, definitions, and concepts. But it is quite thorough in its explanation and discussion of said content. For example, in section 4.2, the text identifies, defines, and discusses 4 different listening styles. These immediately became vocabulary words, but, at the same time, they are explained and illustrated in such a way that students who face the challenge of public speaking can easily recognize the different types in their potential audience(s) and adapt their speeches to suit the appropriate style(s). Section 5.2, which focuses on different types of audience analysis, is similarly detailed in its use of specialized language and, here again, students are likely to match their speech preparation to the type of audience analysis that suits their particular rhetorical situation. I make a distinction between vocabulary/specialized language--which has a purpose and serves to deepen understanding; and jargon, which is only intended to impress people, on a shallow level. This text is rich in vocabulary and specialized language and mercifully devoid of jargon.

The text registers the tension between focusing on the speaker and focusing on the audiences and does an admirably job of demonstrating how they are two sides of the same coin. The 5 Canons of Rhetoric form a sort of shadow-organization for the early chapters, with the above-mentioned emphasis on ethics introduced early on, and integrated throughout. Later chapters use the anatomy of a speech as an organizational structure. The text concludes with consideration of the different genres of public speaking. This is all to the benefit of students. It makes the content seem to unfold logically and demystifies the art and technique of public speaking.

This is one of the real benefits of this text. When I used it in class I was able to portion out particular chapters as individual reading assignments. The emphasis on ethics and the responsibility of the speaker to consider the relationship with, and to the audience, forms the conceptual glue that holds these chapters together. I used the chapters out of order. For example, I like to discuss different genres of speaking fairly early in the term. Also, I like to discuss language and argument in smaller chunks throughout the term. These strategies were all possible with this text. It's quite flexible.

As mentioned above, this text has a useful flow, as it moves from a set of chapters loosely based on the 5 Canons of Rhetoric, to a set of chapters built around the anatomy of a speech, and, finally, to a set of chapters covering some key genres of public speaking. Introducing "ethics" in the 2nd chapter is especially useful.

Interface issues are strong. The figures are easy to read and understand. Navigating is a breeze with not only chapter breaks, but also section links to click on.

The text is written in a professional style, free of grammatical errors. Nonetheless, it is a highly readable and accessible text, to which my students responded positively.

This text reflects cultural sensitivity and is inclusive. This is reflected in photographic images, illustrative examples, and the general ethical disposition of the text. Section 2.2 contains the NCA Credo for Ethical Communication. This not only familiarizes students with a set of principles reflecting a high ethical standard, but it seems to set the standard for this particular text.

This is a strong text. It has all of the content that other texts have, but with its thoroughness and its consistent integration and discussion of ethics, it gives students something extra, something useful, something important. As I said above, I used this text alongside another, and students routinely preferred this text.

Reviewed by Jessica Papajcik, Associate Professor, Stark State College on 8/13/19

Stand up, Speak out scores well on comprehensiveness. It's breadth in coverage is what we should expect for a public speaking course. The table of contents is detailed and covers all subsections within each chapter. However, there is no glossary and this text does not provide sidebars for key terms and/or concepts. On a positive note, this text includes learning objectives at the beginning of each chapter, "Key Takeaways" which is a bulleted summary, and an "Exercises" section at the end of each SUB-SECTION in every chapter. It also contains End-of-Chapter Assessment questions, however, answers are provided directly underneath the questions.

Stand up, Speak out is accurate in terms of content and writing. It is written objectivity with inclusive language.

Stand up, Speak out is written and arranged in a straight-forward way. Maintaining and updating this text should prove to be simple and easy to implement.

Stand up, Speak out is written clearly with many practical examples. Key terms are bold within the text and defined accordingly.

Stand up, Speak out uses consistent formatting in terms of chapter layouts, subsection headings, key terms, fonts, and images.

Modularity rating: 4

Stand up, Speak out is divided into chapters, which are divided into sections, which are divided by concepts. The information is "chunked" in such a way that smaller reading sections can easily be assigned and students start/stop in the review process. I am not a fan, however, of the style of the chunking within the subsections. The font used to label each section concept is much too large and there is too much white space above and below the titles.

Instructors disagree on the order of topics within a public speaking course. This text seems logically organized although I would have preferred the section on argument be moved into the persuasion section near the end of the text rather than put with researching and supporting materials.

Stand up, Speak out works well as an E-text. It navigates easily and the images and font are not distorted. The display is easy to follow and use.

Stand up, Speak out is free of grammatical errors.

While this text is not offensive, it does not adequately incorporate and weave culture through the fabric of the text as I feel it should. It severely lacks content in terms of the cultural perspective. As a previous reviewer claimed, this text is "culturally void."

Overall, this text is a sufficient option for a public speaking course. Most instructors will need to supplement in terms of rhetorical theory, culture, and arguments/reasoning.

Reviewed by James Jarc, Assistant Professor, Central Ohio Technical College on 7/29/19

This text is very thorough and comprehensive for the most part. The content is well organized and clearly presented to the reader. Topics are all relevant to a basic public speaking course, and some of the modules could even be used for professional development or workplace training programs! Each chapter includes a clear introduction as well as learning goals, review points/key takeaways, activities, and citations. While the text does not include an index, the chapter navigation feature is useful and handy. The search function is also quite convenient. I would have liked to see the authors include some more focused "key terms" and definitions, but that does not necessarily take away from the quality of this text.

This textbook is quite accurate. The authors do a good job explaining complex concepts and providing support for the main arguments. Citations are clear and come from good source materials. The text is not biased, per say, but it is written in a very colloquial style which lends itself to some editorializing, and sometimes feels less than authoritative.

This book is as relevant as possible, given the long-standing and historic nature of public speaking content. The book appeals to contemporary readers through the tone of the writing, imagery, examples, and exercises. It also includes more up-to-date information about technology, including references to popular presentation software/services. Some content, of course, will become outdated over time, but this text generally includes content that will age gracefully.

For the most part, the text is written in a clear, accessible voice. As noted above however, I found that sometimes the writing feels too familiar to the reader, and may not be as clear as it could be. Given the subject matter and the intended audience, however, the non-technical, non-academic writing should be welcome for students in a basic public speaking course.

Consistency rating: 4

Writing, content, organization, and support are all mostly consistent throughout this book. The authors include visual cues (such as bold words for key terms), and utilize a common formatting schema throughout. Some chapters contain more depth than others, though this is understandable as some topics are more complex than others. Chapter exercises also vary in terms of quality, complexity, and learning objectives.

This text is clearly organized, and presented in manageable sections. Each chapter is divided into subsections for enhanced modularity. Further, each section contains clear headers and succinct paragraphs, with numbers and bullets when appropriate.

In general, this text contains a clear and reasonable organizational structure. I personally disagree with how the chapters are organized (e.g., informative and persuasive speaking are near the end; introductions and conclusions are separated from delivery), but this is a matter of personal preference. All the information is there, and is formatted so that I could easily assign readings in a different order.

I found the design and interface of the text to be clear and user-friendly. The online format works really well. I enjoyed having the chapters and subsections in the sidebar for easy access. The search tool is also helpful.

Grammatical Errors rating: 4

There are a handful of grammatical and stylistic issues throughout this text. I did also note some errors with formatting of in-text citations and references as well. None of these issues are overwhelming to the reader, nor to they detract seriously from the usability of the material.

This material is generally free from cultural bias, and makes attempts to use inclusive and culturally-sensitive language. I found no instances of offensive or inappropriate content. The book does include some aspects of intercultural communication, but I feel it could go a bit deeper in some places.

Overall, a fine textbook for the basic public speaking course. It's packed with good information, provides solid recommendations for students, and offers great support for educators. The online format is a delight to use!

Reviewed by Lori Adair, Adjunct Instructor, Aims Community College on 6/5/19

This text book is very inclusive and covers all the typical concepts you would expect to find in a public speaking text with additional hyperlinks to extra content. The content is explained clearly, and often in a more concise method than many other textbooks. • Each section within each chapter also comes with additional information including: learning objectives, making it clear what students will gain from each chapter, key takeaways, chapter exercises with an answer key. • The text uses a clean, easy-to-read font with appropriate and appealing free and public domain images • This textbook does not come with an index or glossary but it does have an effective table-of-contents and search tool. The search tool will lead the reader to a page that includes all the sections where terms or concepts are referenced. However. the reader then has to select “read more” to find the actual term which can be a bit frustrating • The text did a great job discussing newer technologies and options when presenting computer-based media aids

All content is clearly explained and comes with an excellent variety of images given appropriate credit including hyperlinks to the original image content. The content did appear to be as relevant, error-free, and unbiased as any of the numerous public speaking texts I have used over the past 30 years.

The book was created in 2011 and utilizes timeless content so that no matter when the reader examines this text, they will find it useful and appropriate though perhaps a bit dated with some images and examples. However, public speaking concepts have remained constant for decades allowing the authors a lot of freedom in their content. Nonetheless, additional resources for presentations and online speaking would enhance the text books. Public speaking is often taken online and it could be helpful to discuss how to gather an audience and use resources to easily record and upload presentations.

The text is designed much like an actual speech outline. Each section comes with a preview, a body, and a summary, all of which are clear and concise. The authors use ordinary language easily understood by a wide audience without being overly simplistic. The author considers its audience and involves them using pronouns such as us, you and we.

• The chapters move from general to specific in terms of content and conceptual framework making it easy to follow and understand where concepts are likely to be found. The chapter learning objectives and takeaways present clear objectives for what the reader should learn and what they should understand after reading the content. Each chapter then provides exercises to reinforce the content. • The text follows a consistent pattern throughout, including bolding key words, and hyperlinking extra content and references. However, they could be more consistent with chapter exercises. Some provide question and answers but some don’t. For example, 15.4 provides an excellent exercise asking the reader to understand what is wrong with a specific slide but they don’t provide an answer. Ideally there would be more examples covering many problems with slides. They could even link to longer quizzes testing the concepts.

This text makes good use of heading design. Each section begins and ends the same and takes advantage of consistent colors to indicate learning objectives (black/gray box), key takeaways (green box) and exercises (blue box). It was very easy to find specific concepts using the contents tab. Information is presented in small, easily digested chunks. The only dissatisfaction I experienced was having to navigate to the next section after a very brief intro to the chapter. Example: Ch 4 The Importance of Learning. We are provided with 2 brief paragraphs and then a reference. You must navigate to 4.1 to learn more. Students will find it easy to skip the intro sections and go right into the first sections, missing out on valuable information. For this reason, I recommend merging section intros with the content for the first part of each chapter to encourage reading it.

Overall, the topics are presented in a logical order, though they add important information about the first speech in an appendix. By calling it an appendix, it appears less important. This is highly important! Perhaps make this an entire chapter with full example speeches and slide decks to give the appendix more value. If a different order of material is preferred, it’s easy enough to assign sections in the order desired.

This text can be viewed online electronically or downloaded into several formats including EPUB, Digital and Print Pdf, allowing an option for any user preference. • For the online version, the home page provides an excellent table of contents which is hyperlinked allowing the reader to go directly to the desired section. However, once in the text, navigation is less intuitive. For example, the reader can use the contents to navigate to any sub-section, but once you reach the end of the page, you must select the contents button at the top again to move forward, or, even less intuitive initially, the reader can advance through the content by selecting the next arrow at the bottom right of the page. This is a bit cumbersome, but not too difficult to work with. It would be better if that content tab were locked at the top of the screen while the reader scrolls down to read. • This text provides a search tool making finding specific topics or terms very easy to find. • Readers are given the option to increase font size for easy reading comfort. • While all links worked, some had to be selected a second time to make the connection. • There are no page numbers for the electronic guide, so if a student downloads a different version, referring to specific pages is not possible.

The text contains a number of minor errors including typos and misspellings. For a text of this size, it’s not overwhelming, but for a professional document, these instances should have been discovered and removed, and doing so would improve this text. These errors include a number of misspelled names such as George in one place and Geogre in another. Other specific misspellings and typos include but aren't limited to: Atrocitties, Publiclly, noisef, Suprisingly, condominium, opporutunity, Settiing, Aloting, Bilbiography.

It could also be a stylistic choice the author made including how commas, dashes and hyphens are used, or more accurately, not incorporated. Examples include using words not identified in a standard dictionary such as nonuseful and nonoffensive. The text lacks commas after most introductory elements or between clauses and phrases consistently through the text. It also lacks space between words such as (but not limited to) "orphansin”, order)Author, Laudel’sJournal

Cultural references were appropriate and up-to-date from my perspective. Images appear to be varied and diverse to make all readers feel represented. When discussing audience diversity, the inclusion of the word chrono-centric surprised and delighted me.

Overall, this OER text is excellent and I will be using it! It's ahead of its time given that it was written in 2011. What I like most is that it provides meaningful content in concise chunks, an approach that seems best-suited to my students these days.

Reviewed by Adria Goldman, Assistant Professor of Communication, University of Mary Washington on 4/26/19

The book touches on the main topics traditionally covered in a public speaking text/class, ranging from the role of ethics to the different types of speeches (informative, persuasive, entertaining). The text guides readers through the speech process, noting the role of both speakers and audiences. While I did not find a glossary or index, the table of contents is detailed and helps with navigating through the text.

I did not note any inaccurate information.

The content is up-to-date and includes examples and activities to help bring in new, relevant material. I suspect any future necessary updates will be 'relatively easy and straightforward to implement'.

The text provides a breakdown of key terms and concepts. The information is clear for college students to follow.

I did not note any inconsistencies in the text. The consistency in the organization is a nice treat that will likely help students follow along (each chapter follows similar format--objectives, content, major takeaways and activities/discussion questions).

The table of contents in broken into subsections, given users the ability to re-organize the material to fit their course design.

Topics follow a logical order. However, as noted above, the organization and presentation of the book provides users with the opportunity to move things around to fit the course. In addition (as noted above) the organization of the Table of Contents is very user friendly.

Overall, the interface of the text is clear and user-friendly. The table of contents to the side (with appropriate links and redirects to different pages) seems like it would be very useful for students moving through an online text. I did notice a link that didn't work (White House source, section 1.2) but I believe that is a quick fix. It is also helpful that users have the option to make text larger.

I did not note any grammatical errors.

The book does not appear culturally insensitive or offensive.

Some of the images were a tad confusing. Perhaps captions would help. For example, there's a puzzle (with missing piece) for section 11.1 on conclusions. Is this because 'conclusion is the final puzzle piece in the speech'? I assume so, but students may question the relevancy of some photos. I was also unclear on the reference style used. The references appear to be in APA but direct quotes do not include a page or paragraph number with the parenthetical citations. This may be confusing for students who are expected to learn and use APA. Lastly, I think it is great that the book is offered in various formats.

Reviewed by Sunni Davis, Faculty, Communication Studies, University of Arkansas Cossatot on 4/25/19

The text was very complete and covered the essentials for a basic introductory course in public speaking. Giving students a solid base in delivery is a key to giving confidence to beginning speakers, and this text covers the essentials in clear and concise language. I particularly liked the sections on explaining the pros and cons of different speaking formats. End of chapter exercises were nicely done. I missed a glossary.

I found the methodology in the book to be in line with most popular textbooks on the subject.

The text reflects standard methods of teaching public speaking. Although technology changes, the basic precepts of instruction are adequate and the chapter on research can be easily supplemented to update as needed.

The language is appropriate for beginning speakers. It is clear, concise, casual and avoids overusing passive voice.

Language is consistent and in spite of including multiple authors, is seamless. Terminology and framework is reflective of standard textbooks.

Nicely divided.

I like to start students speaking early in a course, but this book places relevant information closer to the end of the text. That isn't really a problem as chapter readings can be assigned in any order, and I suppose instructors differ on the best way to teach students. My personal preference would be more integrated materials - the appendices could easily be integrated into chapter sub-topics.

Easy to navigate, no visible distortion of materials.

Nicely written.

Good section on audience analysis, but I would like to see more emphasis on inclusiveness and cultural sensitivity.

Overall, I thought it was a good, basic book that will work well for any beginning public speaking class. I was very happy to see the chapter on ethics and thought the end of chapter exercises for that section were quite appropriate. I also liked the explanation of the different speaking formats. Using pyramids as a visual reinforced the foundational nature of the text.

Reviewed by Emily Plec, Professor, Open Oregon Educational Resources - Western Oregon University on 4/17/19

The only thing lacking from the book is a good foundation and introduction to the classical study of rhetoric from which contemporary public speaking practice draws. read more

The only thing lacking from the book is a good foundation and introduction to the classical study of rhetoric from which contemporary public speaking practice draws.

The text uses some outdated terminology and examples, and demonstrates bias in terms of representation (mostly images of white males, few examples of contemporary speakers who diversify the visual representation). On the whole, though, the content is not overtly objectionable and shortcomings could be acknowledged or discussed in class.

The structure of the text affords a lot of chapter coverage to material that will not need frequent updating. Given the level of detail in the chapters, though, deciding what needs to be updated where might be challenging.

Clear writing but a far cry from compelling, especially for a course that introduces students to elements of style.

I felt this was one of its strengths. There was a lot of useful repetition and high degrees of internal consistency.

I liked the searchable digital PDF version and did not preview other versions of the text. It is suitable for my purposes.

I felt the overview of purposes was unnecessary and feel argumentation needs to be addressed earlier in the text.

I found the text very easy to interface with and find that for which I was looking.

Some inelegant phrasing but no glaring grammatical errors in the chapters I read.

This is where the book could be most improved.

Reviewed by Doug Marshall, Assistant Professor , SUNO on 3/25/19

I find Stand up, Speak out to be a very comprehensive public speaking textbook. I find no major deficiencies with this work and find it to be very comparable to the major players in popular public speaking texts. read more

I have no real issue with the accuracy of this textbook. Some may have different opinions in regard to the positions and assumptions of the author but this is clearly accurate.

One of my biggest gripes about popular public speaking texts is that many of them are packed with examples that are relevant for that one particular moment in time. In other words, public speaking texts purposely age themselves so that the author can update with new timely examples and sell more copies. This text is nearly void of popular culture references thus allowing the instructor to make those references his or herself. Excellent!

A textbook for an introductory course should not lose the students. This text presented material in a polished, clear way that helpfully unpacked any jargon or technical language that was used. I believe that this text balances the idea of meeting the student where he/she is and inviting them to become part of a bigger conversation.

The structure of this textbook was clear and consistent. Terminology is used consistently.

It is divided up well. I see no issues here.

I question some of their placement of the topics but I would just simply assign the chapters to be read out of order. For instance, the final chapter is preparing students for their first speech. Ideally, they would be covering this early because it is rare to wait until the end of the class to give the first speech. This small problem that I have can be easily addressed by the instructor.

The interface is fairly standard but good.

I admittedly do not have a great eye for grammatical errors (see all examples of my writing) but I found nothing problematic with this text.

I found no issues of cultural inappropriateness.

Overall I enjoyed Stand up, Speak out. It has all of the necessary elements that a basic public speaking text should have. It is well written and has made me reconsider these open source texts.

Reviewed by Robert Green, Assistant Professor of Communication Studies, Bloomsburg University of Pennsylvania on 3/13/19

Although the comprehensiveness of this textbook might be a barrier to some students, and although the market appears to be trending towards minimalist textbooks, the comprehensiveness of this textbook is one of its strongest points. Many commercial textbooks appear to take a "lean and mean" approach to the subject in terms of small chapters, efficient textual information, colorful stock art, and online subscription models. I think an apt comparison would be with "throwaway fashion trends."

This book, on the other hand, prioritizes comprehensive substance. In fact, I've used this book as a reference to supplement commercial textbooks. For example, I believe that the section on Using Notes Effectively (14.3) is the most-fully principled, conceptualized, and explained account on the subject (let alone among competing open-source texts).

I take off a point because the book lacks a glossary, index, or a listing of key terms at the start or end of chapters. Moreover, I could easily see how some students might get lost due to the comprehensive and substantive nature of the text. Nonetheless, clearly-labeled learning objectives and exercises should provide some guidance for students and instructors.

Content Accuracy rating: 3

Although this textbook generally provides a standard account, you might issue with liberties taken with traditional approaches. Content is, for the most part, accurate. Concepts are grounded in relevant research literature, and a variety of examples are used to illustrate these concepts. I don't detect any unfair biases.

However, you are likely to find some odd, though minor, deviations. For example, I find issue with how the book models outline symbolization. In this text, subordinate points are listed as Arabic numerals (1., 2., 3.) rather than upper-case capitals (A., B., C.). Although that might not bother those unwed to tradition, I'm not sure why the change is an improvement. You'll also notice that Main Point II of the sample outline (pp. 329-331) does not meet the rule of division. Finally, the textbook should correctly model assignments. I would also like to know why APA references are not formatted with hanging indent. Ultimately, I think these are issues that should be addressed in the next installment.

Textbooks on public speaking tend to lag when it comes to technological advances and current events (such popularization of "fake news" and conspiracies). Research librarians have developed new guidelines on evaluating the quality of sources, and I hope future updates will incorporate this research.

Nevertheless, I find that many principles of public speaking are timeless, and this book does an adequate job of establishing and explaining the importance of such principles. I often find myself building off of these principles to introduce new developments.

I appreciate that the text establishes expectations of intellectual rigor.

The text offers a substantive, comprehensive account of public speaking balanced by a casual tone. Chapters are clearly organized. Key concepts are in bold, and examples are of sufficient quality and quantity.

I find the tone and style to be consistent throughout the text, which is often a problem with open-source public speaking texts.

I generally find the textbook to be well organized with chapters broken down into key sub-topics.

I find no issue with the organization of the book. It is organized in a logical fashion, and the modularity of the text enables you to organize the sequence of materials as you desire. I do wonder what purpose the appendixes serve. Why not include them in the chapters?

I find no issue with the interface of the digital pdf. The hyperlinks to various chapters and sub-sections appear to work, and I can generally navigate the text with minimal effort using the search function.

Grammatical Errors rating: 3

I've found minor grammatical/typographical/stylistic issues. E.g. look at where Appendix 1 is listed on the table of contents. I've also found issue with APA formatting, in model student materials and in end-of-chapter references. Students find APA style challenging enough as it is, and the textbook's errant ways will only introduce more confusion.

As a prior review has mentioned, public speaking is grounded in the western tradition. This book is grounded in that tradition, for better and for worse. There is no explicit chapter on intercultural communication. Important concepts related to culture and diversity are embedded in discussions of audience analysis, ethics, and language choice (among other areas). For a public speaking class, I prefer the embedded approach because it develops a sense of inclusion and diversity as practice. Much has happened over the past two years with respect to diversity and inclusion, so instructors might wish to supplement materials to account for developments.

Although I do find issue with how the book covers some issues, I generally believe that the book offers a comprehensive account of the subject. It is well organized and written in an accessible style.

Reviewed by Carrie Tomko, Senior Lecturer, OhioLink on 3/5/19

From start to finish, Stand Up Speak Out (SUSO) contains a comprehensive collection of topics on public speaking, ideal for the college classroom. There is nothing lacking in this online resource. read more

From start to finish, Stand Up Speak Out (SUSO) contains a comprehensive collection of topics on public speaking, ideal for the college classroom. There is nothing lacking in this online resource.

No issues with accuracy.

The textbook is set in a timeless fashion, without reference to current pop culture that might fade over time, as are other textbooks available. Therefore, this one will stand the test of time.

OUTSTANDING clarity in presentation of topics and subtopics, with step-by-step choices and advice in constructing a speech, for example.

The format of the book's verbiage consistently presents information to the student in a way that is parsed and absorbed easily. Headlines and sub-headlines add to this easy.

Easily, this textbook can be referenced in whole, or in partiality. Whether teaching a semester's worth or a chapter's worth, Stand Up Speak Out (SUSO) provides pockets of information full of details.

As an educator, I appreciated the practical layout of each chapter, as well as with the collection of chapters that flow naturally and logically, sure to enhance student learning.

No issues in interface. Nothing distracting or confusing for the reader.

I found no errors with grammar.

The textbook does not offer politically incorrect presentation.

Clearly, this is the best open textbook available for a public speaking course!

Reviewed by Rachel Davidson, Assistant Professor of Communication, Hanover College on 1/25/19

The book covers every necessary aspect that students need to know for an introductory public speaking course. read more

The book covers every necessary aspect that students need to know for an introductory public speaking course.

Not a heavy emphasis on a rhetorical approach to public speaking but I think that is ok for an introductory class who may not fully understand the rhetorical tradition.

Some examples are likely to be dated soon but that is to be expected with any textbook.

The language used to convey the ideas is appropriate for a student reader.

The book is consistent with other public speaking textbooks and uses consistent language throughout.

Students will appreciate how easily the book can be navigated by section/topic.

Organizationally, the book reads well and seems to chronologically follow the speechmaking process.

Navigation is clear and straightforward.

I didn't notice grammatical errors.

Text is not insensitive or offensive though is written from an implied Western framework that privileges American expectations in effective public speaking--not a detriment to the book, just an observation.

Reviewed by Ben Walker, Associate Professor, Southwest Minnesota State University on 9/25/18

This text has everything you'd expect in an introduction to public speaking book. read more

This text has everything you'd expect in an introduction to public speaking book.

All the information is accurate and in line with the discipline as a whole.

The authors have done a nice job making sure the content is relevant. Nothing is significantly dated.

The writing and flow of the book is easy to understand and terms are explained well. The visual aspect of the text also makes it appealing.

The book is consistent throughout, with no major issues. Everything is unified in the approach to teach public speaking.

All the chapters make sense. They are separated in a similar fashion as most public speaking textbooks.

The topics are organized in a similar fashion as most public speaking textbooks. The topics build skills from foundational to more advanced.

Visually, the book is pleasing to the eye and does not distract from the content.

No major grammatical errors that I saw.

This text is not insensitive, but it does approach public speaking in a very ethnocentric way. American academia is rooted in whiteness and so is it's traditions. The textbook is appropriate for introduction courses because it is similar to what most textbooks offer. That being said, what most texts offer is based on a public speaking tradition that is a bit stale and focused on traditional Western/white oratory.

Solid text. I am happy there is something of this quality for free.

Reviewed by Kristen Hungerford, Visiting Assistant Professor, Miami University on 8/2/18

Comprehensiveness rating: 3 see less

The text covers all areas and ideas that are typically discussed in an introduction to public speaking book. However, the textbook is missing an index or glossary of terms that would be important for students to refer to and learn from, either placed at the beginning or end of each chapter or at the end of the textbook. Also, in my printed version of the text, the table of contents states that there should be appendices at the end of the book. However, there were none located at the end of my printed version of the text.

The book is accurate in its explanation of relevant course content on the fundamentals of public speaking. The author provides a wide variety of examples from many different cultural sources.

The content is up-to-date. Other then maybe sharing more popular or widely known examples, content in public speaking textbooks does not dramatically change. Really the only updates that continue to change are in regards to media/technology and public speaking and maybe more current examples of ethics in public speaking.

The text is accessible for all reading levels. The only drawback I noticed in the textbook is the lack of citing enough or any references as in-text citations throughout the chapter or at the end of the chapter. It is typical to see more direct citations from ancient and modern rhetoric and communication sources listed throughout the chapters of public speaking textbooks. This task also reinforces to students the importance of conducting research and properly citing sources.

The text is internally consistent in terms of terminology and framework that is standard for a textbook on public speaking.

The text is easily presented into smaller reading sections that may help students retain information. However, in comparison to other public speaking textbooks, I think that having some of the smaller reading sections in the textbook makes it too choppy. I would prefer to view a more continuous stream of thought on some of the topics in some of the chapters with listed subheadings of course, as I have seen done more effectively in other public speaking textbooks.

The topics follow the typical arrangement of course content on public speaking for this kind of text. The topics provide a natural progression for students learning about speech preparation.

The printed version of this textbook does not contain any page numbers. Page numbers are only listed in the table of contents in the printed version. The lack of page numbers in the printed version would make it very hard for an instructor to use during class time. It would make it nearly impossible to direct students toward certain page numbers for course content and examples.

The text seems to contain no grammatical errors.

As previously stated, the textbook uses a variety of cultural examples of public speaking situations. The only drawback that I notice is that the examples are not famous or popular ones that students might relate to more when reading the book. In other public speaking textbooks, I tend to see copyrighted examples of really popular public speakers - such as from national politicians or entertainers, etc. However, I understand that it might cost more to acquire the rights to those really popular public speaking examples.

The biggest drawbacks included not enough listed references, no listed glossary of key terms, no listed page numbers in the printed copy of the text, and a lack of popular examples from public speeches. Other than those areas, I think a reader would be more engaged with reading a textbook with more eye catching, fancier headings and other aesthetics, including more images, graphics, and charts to further explain key concepts.

Reviewed by Ruth Fairchild, Instrucotr, Ridgewater College on 6/19/18

Stand Up, Speak Out covers public speaking effectively, providing clear explanations of the content. As the title says, both the practical and ethical aspects are included. The sections on audience-centered speech design, research, and evaluation of sources are especially thorough. One area that some instructors may expect, but will not find, is the history of public speaking; fortunately that could be supplemented easily with material from other sources.

The content is presented fairly and accurately. Examples within the text show a broad range of contexts and applications for public speaking. The visual components of the text vividly enhance reader understanding. Two of the images in Chapter 15 do not match the correlating text, but otherwise the figures are well chosen and explained.

Much in public speaking stays the same over the years, but this text emphasizes the relevance of the field and the related skills in the 21st century. In several chapters, this point is made through a “why” section: why public speaking, why analyze the audience, why outline. Throughout the text examples draw from current affairs and social media, as well as from contemporary students. As the text ages, these examples may need to be updated since many are from before 2010.

The text excels in clarity and ease of reading. Key words are shown in blue letters and are explained within the text itself. A glossary or lists of key words by chapter would be useful and eventually may be available through the shared supplemental materials.

The structure is consistent throughout. Headings are in bold and are clearly spaced. The inclusion of learning objectives at the beginning of each section and of the coordinating key takeaways at the end reinforce the focus of the section. After the initial chapter on ethics, the end-of-chapter “Speaking Ethically” exercises tie the content together nicely.

The division of the chapters and sections would make it easy to assign them according to a variety of schemes. A different organization of the text would not detract from its cohesive feel. When a concept is referred to in a later section, a reference to the previous coverage of it is given. However, more such references could be given in earlier sections to highlight that further coverage of certain concepts is available in another section. For example, Chapter 9 refers to Chapter 6, but 6 does not refer to 9. In short, more cross-text references would be welcome.

Even though the chapters and sections could be assigned in varied orders, the overall organization of the text is coherent and cohesive. It matches common structures of public speaking texts, moving from foundational topics to speech design and delivery, and then to types of speeches.

Readers can navigate the text smoothly from one part to another using the pull-down table of contents. Images display nicely online and look the same in the PDF version. I did not try the mobile versions but would expect them to work well, too.

The textbook contains minimal typographical or grammatical errors.

The images and examples in the text provide diversity. Since there are no sections overtly related to cultural variations in public speaking or to diverse students’ challenges with it, instructors would need to cover that with supplemental materials.

Although I currently use the online Public Speaking Project textbook and find it effective, I would be likely to try Stand Up, Speak Out because it is a bit more streamlined.

Reviewed by Lisa Hoopis, Adjunct Professor, Rhode Island College on 6/19/18

This book was very easy to understand and comprehend. I plan on using this with my peer education group who has to do public speaking. This text was perfect in covering the basics and giving them a good foundation. read more

The book was accurate and up to date. I like that the information was supported by research and examples.

The basics of public speaking were covered here and relevant examples were used. I feel it would have to be updated regularly to keep it up to date but that can easily be done with current examples.

The book seemed straight forward, relevant and to the point and covered all of the basics I would expect it to cover. I like that it clearly discusses issues around plagiarism and freedom of speech and was divided into 4 clear areas. In this day of political turmoil I feel it is helpful for speech writing and also having thoughtful, meaningful challenging conversations.

The book was consistent in format and layout and was the framework was laid out with objectives and references which I think is important.

I did not see any issues with the layout. I like how the information was presented and repeated for comprehension. I liked objectives were clearly laid out and there was a table of contents that organized everything nicely.

I really enjoyed the layout of this and flow throughout the book. I think it would be easy to assign students sections of this book although it is difficult to navigate to sections without going through the entire book. I like that it starts students at the beginning gaining confidence, considering audience d then creating and delivering the speech. I would have also liked to see something on seeking and accepting feedback and journaling the experience at the end. I liked the way the chapters were laid out and organized.

It is difficult to find a particular section without going through the entire book. I would like to see clickable tabs on the side that would take you to where you need to go rather than just the errors to the next section. I liked the visual features and the tips it offered. Some of the links did not work which was frustrating especially if students want to get more information. I liked how it provided objectives at he start of the chapter and a review of the info. for comprehension.

I did not notice any grammatical errors.

I would have liked to see more on this area. I do feel it was a little weak in this area and would recommend adding something around mention of privilege and presenting to communities you are not a part of and being culturally aware and sensitive and using inclusive language is important.

I would have liked to see more on preparing for controversy at the conclusion and responding to difficult questions. Overall I feel this text did a fantastic job at covering the basics and I am considering using this text with my peer educators.

Reviewed by Brian Timm, Professor, North Hennepin Community College on 5/21/18

This text addresses key concepts appropriate for an introductory level public speaking course. The content is extensive and larger courses may not have the time to address all of the material included. It would be nice to see more coverage about how to effectively present in group contexts. No glossary, but the online search function is user friendly. Coverage of ethics in public speaking would create opportunities for class discussions.

Content is accurate, arranged in a useful manner. It appears to be free from overt bias.

The content appears to be up to date, though some of the examples may require more context in the future.

Textbook is written clearly and accessible for an introductory college level course.

Terms are used consistently and in an accessible format. The end of chapter exercises allow students to reflect on the content learned in each chapter.

The text is presented in a way that would make it easily adaptable to different course structures or schedules. The content does not rely on being presented in a specific order.

The structure of the content in the text is logical. Presenting the introduction, body, and conclusion content in separate chapters allows for more time to focus on each rather than having them lumped together.

The text is easily searchable for terms both online and in PDF format. The online version makes moving between chapters easy with the navigation menu.

No major grammatical errors or typos.

The text does not appear overtly culturally insensitive. Given the emphasis on speaker ethics, this makes sense.

The outlining section could offer more examples, but overall this is a solid introduction to public speaking textbook.

Reviewed by Narissra Punyanunt-Carter, Associate Professor, Texas Tech University on 3/27/18

This is the BEST public speaking book on the market. It covers every major and essential aspect of public speaking. read more

This is the BEST public speaking book on the market. It covers every major and essential aspect of public speaking.

The information is completely accurate and unbiased. Students love using this book!

The book provides several examples that help make the public speaking easier to comprehend and retain. The information is straightforward and very relatable.

The book is clear and concise!

The terms in this book are consistent with other text books on the market.

The author(s) do a great job confining and reiterating information so that students can truly learn the information.

The organization of this book is logical, straightforward, and clear. I love how this book is organized. It helps making a speech easier and effective.

The book provides great visual features so that it makes learning fun and exciting.

No grammatical errors. It is written very well!

This book is perfect for all classes on public speaking. It is inclusive of all races, ethnicities, and backgrounds.

I've reviewed a lot of public speaking textbooks in my career. This book is by far the most thorough and most comprehensive books on public speaking. My students truly enjoy learning from this book. And I adore using this book to teach public speaking. If instructors need a public speaking textbook, then they should definitely use this book. I would require it for all my public speaking courses.

Reviewed by Morgan Hess, Instructor of Record, University of Maryland on 2/1/18

The text covers all areas and ideas of the subject appropriately, some with more originality than others. The ethics approach is interesting, and provides for many discussion starting points. The practical how-tos (speaking anxiety, visual aids,... read more

There is not an effective index and/or glossary.

I didn't see any bias or errors. Lots of citations for curious or unconvinced students.

The book basically perpetuates the known facts and information regarding public speaking. It's not particularly culturally relevant, so take that as you will. The information is straight forward and user friendly.

SO clear! any undergraduate can easily read and understand it. The examples are especially clear.

The progression of ideas make sense, moving from a general conceptual framework in the early chapters to more specific applications later on. Terms were consistently defined and used.

Divided easing into assigned readings.

As mentioned above, the structure was logical. I won't have to mis up chapters on my syllabus, which is nice.

Simple, colorful, easy to see.

I didn't notice anything!

It's not insensitive or unethical (haha!) in any way. It's not particularly "culturally relevant" in the examples it uses, but If this question is asking about its accessibility its perfectly adequate.

I like it! Puts a different spin on public speaking for an intro class, and definitely worth pulling from.

Reviewed by David Sours, Humanities Instructor, Rogue Community College on 8/15/17

The book’s discussion is generally thorough, explaining concepts clearly, illustrating their importance to the speech development process, and providing concrete examples. Particularly excellent are the discussions of ethics (especially plagiarism issues), listening critically, and audience analysis. Also good are the sections on how to select a speech topic and purpose, research and citing sources, developing main points and supporting evidence, common organization patterns and outlining techniques, and constructing arguments. Practice, delivery, presentation aids--all of the topics common to college public speaking courses are included in sufficient detail to make this a very useful text.

The section on communication anxiety and how to address it is unremarkable in that it covers similar terrain to most other public speaking texts without shedding new light on the subject. It will nevertheless be useful for many students.

The text has no glossary or index; however the table of contents is interactive and easily accessible from any page, making it easy to hunt down topics of interest. There is an effective search tool as well.

The authors write with precision about all aspects of the public speaking process. They explain concepts clearly, and provide excellent historical and contemporary illustrations. They are meticulous about citing sources. Claims and supporting material appear to be accurate and carefully considered.

Although the text was originally published in 2011, at no time does the content seem to be out of date or irrelevant to our current political or social climate. Because many of the conceptual illustrations are drawn from history, they have a timeless quality. But even the more recent examples will remain useful to speech students for some time, such as a reference to the 2010 debate over the Affordable Care Act. Regardless of changes that may be made in our health care laws, the authors' point should still be relevant for the foreseeable future.

In a number of instances, the authors make effective use of academic forecasts which should continue to have relevance for the foreseeable future. Following is one example, found in section 1.1:

“Researcher Norman W. Edmund estimates that by 2020 the amount of knowledge in the world will double every seventy-three days (Edmund, 2005). Because we live in a world where we are overwhelmed with content, communicating information in a way that is accessible to others is more important today than ever before.”

The text is engaging because of the use of specific and highly relevant examples, word precision, and the use of direct language to draw in the reader (e.g., through the use of direct pronouns). The authors have a highly organized style, making frequent use of previews, transitions, and summaries to maintain reader focus. Terminology is explained clearly and rendered useful through the use of examples that the student reader should be able to relate to.

Also, the authors appear to have many years of experience behind this, and to have given careful thought to some of areas that often can be quite confusing to inexperienced student speakers. For example, their discussion of speech purposes in section 6.1 includes a brief but illuminating analysis of why many people become confused about the difference between informing and persuading. To some, this may seem a minor point, but it can actually lead to significant problems in speech focus and preparation. The authors explain this and other many other issues with great clarity.

Key terms are used with consistency throughout the text. As explained below under Organization, the progression of ideas should make sense to the overwhelming majority of readers, moving from a general conceptual framework in the early chapters to more specific applications and “nuts and bolts” of speech preparation in the later chapters.

Chapter headings are clear, and so are subheadings. Most of the sections of this text can be used as standalone readings. The sequence of topics in the text, while logical, needn’t be followed. The sections are self-explanatory enough that it should be easy for an instructor to re-order the topics as needed. Students who have a particular need to know should be able to zero in on a topic of interest without reading everything that came before it. This text, without a doubt, will work in a modular fashion if that is needed.

While the authors do make use of cross references to other sections of the text, these are primarily provided to make it easy to check back and forth using the hyperlinks which are included. Most readers will appreciate this feature.

The first five chapters address general principles of public speaking such as the overall speech process, ethics, audience analysis, and managing anxiety. Later chapters take these principles and apply them more specifically, zeroing in on how to identify an appropriate topic, how to develop an audience-appropriate focus (specific purpose), how to conduct research, etc. These later chapters furnish excellent examples from student speeches—of purpose and thesis statements, introductions, bodies, conclusions, etc. Many hyperlinks to videos and audios are also furnished for further illustration.

This was an easy-to-use online text. Finding terms using the search tool was a breeze; the sidebar table of contents, found on each page, is very helpful. Most—though not all—of the hyperlinks work. Illustrations are attractive and appropriate, though not particularly imaginative (many appear to be public domain clip art).

One minor font issue concerns key words which are highlighted in blue—the same as hyperlinks. Another minor issue involves the subheadings. There are subheadings and there are what could be called “sub-sub-headings” where a large topic is broken into subtopics which occasionally are broken down still further. Because all the subheadings use the same font and point size, this can lead to confusion over what topic is being addressed, slowing down comprehension.

I found only two typos and one missing word. The grammar is not a problem in this text.

At no time does this text use any language that I would question. Numerous examples are given featuring different races, religions, ethnicities, etc. The authors’ discussion of audience analysis, in particular, is a good lesson on the diversity found in the typical college classroom—even one where most of the students appear to be from a similar ethnic or racial background. As they state in section 5.2: “Not all cultural membership is visibly obvious. For example, people in German American and Italian American families have widely different sets of values and practices, yet others may not be able to differentiate members of these groups. Differences are what make each group interesting and are important sources of knowledge, perspectives, and creativity.”

The authors include some excellent discussion questions at the end of each section, as well as chapter activities and short assessments. These should provide excellent opportunities for partner, small group, and whole class investigations and discussions. Also provided are frequent checklists to help students assess their own progress.

One section I was particularly glad to see—section 6.3—is called “Drawing a Blank.” It does an excellent job of addressing one of the big issues that many inexperienced speakers face—the feeling that they have nothing of interest to talk about. This section offers numerous helpful strategies for getting these students on the right track.

Reviewed by Gregory Epps, Associate Clinical Professor, West Virginia University on 12/5/16

The book covered all of the areas associated with the subject matter. This was a major strength of the book. I did not see a glossary. read more

The book covered all of the areas associated with the subject matter. This was a major strength of the book. I did not see a glossary.

I don't think that the book was biased as was accurate. I think other professional speakers may differ on a few points.

The book basically perpetuates the known facts and information regarding public speaking. The information is straight forward and user friendly.

This book is very clear. It presents information, provides practical examples, and provides good reviews. The writing is easy to follow.

For the most part the is consistent with the information it provides. There was, what I consider, some differentiation regarding the topic of memorizing speeches.

This book did an excellent job dividing topics into sections and sub sections. It was divided appropriately and systematically.

The flow of the book and the structure are very good. The organization likely works well with students, however some of the information seemed to fall later in the book than I would have anticipated.

There were no significant interface issues. The images and other displays were simplistic and colorful.

I noticed no grammatical errors. However, I did find it interesting that there was not a space between paragraphs. I also noticed a few other spacing issues.

There were no issues with cultural relevance. All examples were appropriate an non offensive.

This was a very comprehensive book that covered all of the necessary components of public speaking. There were ample opportunities for review and reinforcement.

The book was somewhat long and I wonder how it was used along with classroom teaching and if everything gets covered thoroughly.

Reviewed by Patria Lawton, Instructor, Inver Hills Community College on 12/5/16

This text is a comprehensive guide to the many aspects of public speaking. So often to save money for the students, Instructors have relied on a pocket guide style of public speaking book. This is a nice option if you want to include the thorough information found in the first 140 pages of the book, which is centered on more general communication theories and principles that aren’t exclusive to Public Speaking, but rather the communication discipline as a whole.

Information presented in the book is accurate for the most part. A more accurate section on outlining should be included with full sentence, properly formatted sample outlines. This is an area where beginning students typically struggle and seeing the formatting be incomplete on the included outlines in this text is a cause for concern as students will often simply “copy” what they see in the text.

Public speaking principles haven’t changed much over the years, so the longevity of the information is solid. That being said, some of the examples are already showing their age – the text included references from 2006, 2010, etc. - that doesn’t seem like that long ago for some of us, but I would prefer to see examples, especially in an online text, that are less than 10 years old. I would imagine that it will take some work to make sure the links are all up-to-date throughout the text because they are so numerous.

Concepts were clearly defined using clear examples for the reader. The text was easily digestible for a student in a 100 level speech course.

The layout of the book was extremely consistent. Each chapter begins with learning objectives and ends with review activities. The sections were arranged in a logical order.

The clear division of the chapters makes it easy for the reader to know where concepts begin and end. It is set up in a way that allows instructors to pick and choose the content in a different order than it is presented. It is also organized in a way that would work if an instructor wanted to work through the material in a sequential order.

A table of contents would provide a roadmap for the reader, which is extremely helpful in a text that is 600+ pages. The parallelism in the chapters is beneficial for the reader as they know when each chapter starts and stops, as well as being able to view outcomes and practice those outcomes at the end of each chapter.

Most of the text was nicely presented. The lack of a reference section as well as the lack of a clickable table of contents in the PDF version made it difficult to navigate – that may have simply been a feature of the PDF version.

There are multiple instances of spacing issues throughout the text. There were also issues in which excerpts from speeches weren’t separated appropriately from the larger text. There are a few places where outlines are referenced, but formatted completely incorrectly (such as the “outline” on page 617).

The text has a section devoted to considering the audience’s diversity which discusses respecting diversity and avoiding stereotypes in your speeches in the ethical speaking section. I thought the speeches referenced by the text were culturally relevant and diverse.

This book would be a great substitute to a traditional public speaking textbook. Although many instructors tend to use the pocket style guides to teach public speaking to keep costs down, those often aren't extensive enough. The few things that are irksome about this book, such as a lack of clickable navigation on the PDF version and the failure to incude any reasonable outline examples can easily be remedied with supplemental material.

Reviewed by David Edwards, Instructor, South Central College, Faribault campus on 8/21/16

All the topics one would expect in a public speaking course are included. They reflect the standard topics found in almost all mainstream public speaking textbooks. There are no topics missing. read more

All the topics one would expect in a public speaking course are included. They reflect the standard topics found in almost all mainstream public speaking textbooks. There are no topics missing.

No inaccuracies found in book, although a couple of the links did not work. No bias found, and it appears the authors are careful to work diversity into the book, both in the names, examples, and samples included.

Book is very up-to-date, which means it would likely need to be updated just as frequently as a printed version for several reasons. Many of the examples and samples provided are current topics or well-known people. In a few years, those will be out-of-date and will need to be updated. One suggestion is to use the word "summary" instead of "key takeaways" at the end of each section/chapter. "Key takeaways" is really a current buzzword in the business world, which will likely not be known by students and won't be used after the "freshness of the term" has worn off.

Book is written using simple, down-to-earth, language. It is very conversational and easy to understand. Public speaking is not an overly-difficult subject to understand, so this really reflects the simplicity of the subject matter.

Book is consistent in terms of terminology and framework (which I am assuming refers to the "look" or layout of the book). Each chapter begins with objectives and ends with a summary and some sample exercises/questions. When chapters have subdivisions, those subdivisions also are consistently laid out.

Text is divided into appropriate chapters and sub-divisions of chapters. However, the book is simply way too long (622 pages!!!) and each page is quite difficult to read due to the fact that each paragraph is NOT separated by a space. This gives each page the appearance of one gigantic paragraph. This makes it a daunting task to read through a page, much less a full chapter (which is very long). This is the reason I wouldn't use this text in my course, although I might use parts of some chapters as supplements to what I currently use.

While all of the chapters seem appropriate, I'd suggest moving a couple of them. First, chapter 4 and chapter 14 should be switched with each other. Chapter 4 deals with delivery and needs to be discussed before the construction of a speech, not after. Second, chapter 15 should come right after chapter 8. Chapter 15 deals with visual aids, which should be discussed at the end of the support chapter (since visual aids are a form of support). While it's true that an instructor can order the chapters in any way he/she wants, I think these two changes will be the most logical order.

Didn't see any interface issues or navigation problems except for a few links that didn't work. To be honest, there were not very many pictures, graphics, or features. Tables were frequently used, perhaps too much as it doesn't look much different than the rest of the block paragraphs of text. Perhaps, more visual variety needed in book.

Grammar is fine, but an important note about mechanics is mentioned above and will be repeated here. The book is simply way too long (622 pages!!!) and each page is quite difficult to read due to the fact that each paragraph is NOT separated by a space. This gives each page the appearance of one gigantic paragraph. This makes it a daunting task to read through a page, much less a full chapter (which is very long). This is the reason I wouldn't use this text in my course, although I might use parts of some chapters as supplements to what I currently use.

Like all current textbooks, it appears that the authors have made a concerted effort to use names, examples, and samples that reflect various cultures. Sometimes, it seems forced.

Thanks for giving me the opportunity to review this book.

Reviewed by Leslie Harris, Associate Professor, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee on 8/21/16

This is a good basic public speaking textbook. It covers the main topics that one would expect in a public speaking textbook and includes plenty of practical advice. The sections on ethics and organization are particularly helpful, and the writing... read more

Comprehensiveness rating: 2 see less

Depending on how an instructor is using the book, a potential weakness is a lack of rhetorical theory. My preference would be that the authors use rhetorical theory to explain why students may be making particular choices in their speeches. The audience, argument, and persuasive sections are particularly weak in this respect. For example, I would have liked to see not only an understanding of the audience and its demographics, but also a consideration of ways in which an audience can be constructed by the speaker. Important elements of persuasion such as framing and identification are absent. The authors do list figures of speech, but there is little consideration of what those figures do or how they may work in public speaking.

A more serious issue is the lack of table of contents, index, glossary, foot/endnotes, and bibliography. The lack of an index, table of contents, and glossary can make it difficult for students to use the book. The absence of notes and bibliography is particularly problematic when we are attempting to teach students to responsibly cite sources. There are markers of notes in the text of the book, but I have been unable to locate any actual notes to correspond to those markers at the end of the pages, chapters, or the book as a whole. My best guess is that the notes were lost in formatting, or perhaps the problem is unique to the pdf version that I read. Nonetheless, these elements need to be present in every version of the book.

I don't see any major problems with accuracy. However, the absence of a bibliography and/or notes is a problem.

Some of the examples could use updating, but I don't see any major issues. There are many web links in the text. I did not check if all of those links are still active, but instructors will need to check the links if they are expecting students use them.

The writing is generally clear and accessible. The learning objectives are clearly stated, and there are good summaries at the end of each section. Some of the checklists also seem very helpful. Clarity could be improved by pulling out definitions into a separate box or glossary. Some of the spacing and formatting issues may also introduce confusion.

The book is generally consistent. I didn't see any major shifts in terminology or anything else that would make me concerned about consistency.

The chapters and subsections are generally clear, and there is an appropriate amount of self referencing. A clear and detailed table of contents would make it easier to assign specific sections and navigate.

The organization of the chapters are clear and similar to other public speaking textbooks. However, Chapter 19 was strange. It seemed like a general summary of the overall book, and at at least one place the book called the chapter an appendix. The chapter seemed disconnected and didn't seem to add much to the overall text.

Interface rating: 2

The book was, at times, difficult to read, and the formatting seemed sloppy. There are no spaces or indents between paragraphs. Throughout the text there are additional spaces or missing spaces between words (such as "anidiom" instead of "an idiom"). Some of the figures are missing (such as 17.1 in my pdf version), and some tables are formatted in a potentially confusing way. The font occasionally changes. There is no easy way to navigate between chapters and because there isn't a table of contents with page numbers, the reader has to scroll through the book to find a particular section or chapter. However, there are not indicators, like chapter titles, at the top of pages to aid navigation. There are also places where sample speeches are not distinguished from the text, so it can be difficult to see where the text ends and the sample speech begins.

I did not see any serious grammar issues.

There is nothing clearly insensitive or offensive in the book, but there also was not a comprehensive treatment of culture. Culture and related issues of power are important to public speaking, and I was disappointed to see only a cursory treatment of these issues.

This book includes practical advice and contains much of what an instructor would expect in a public speaking textbook. I could see the book functioning as a good supplement to a public speaking course. The interface/formatting issues are a problem. Perhaps there are different versions of the book, but all versions need to have notes and bibliography. I am also disappointed by the absence of rhetorical theory. It's impossible to include the content that will satisfy every instructor. However, most public speaking textbooks include at least some rhetorical theory, which I see as important to (1) explaining why we are asking students to make specific decisions and (2) creating a framework for more advanced communication courses.

Reviewed by Katie Trombley, Instructor, M State Community and Technical College on 8/21/16

This textbook was one of the most comprehensive public speaking textbooks I have viewed. However, I found it to be lacking in critical thinking skills, such as identifying fallacies. There was no index, glossary, bibliography, or bold keywords... read more

The majority of the content is accurate. I would like to see "noise" added to The Transactional Model of Communication. The speech outline did not follow the pattern of outlining I use with students. It started with Roman Numerals and then numbers 1, 2, 3, etc. rather than capital letters. A space is needed between “should” and “do” on page 519. The table of contents needs to be updated to include Chapter 19 – Your First Speech.

The overall material is not likely to change in the next few years. MLA and APA guidelines were up-to-date. The biggest drawback in this category is a lot of research cited was over 10 years old.

The authors used a friendly style in their writing that I think would keep students’ attention.

The theme of ethics was seen throughout the book. It was not in every chapter, but some material relates to ethical issues better than other material.

I would have no trouble teaching chapters or sections of chapters out of order from the way they appear in the textbook. There was an appropriate amount of subheadings.

The topics are presented logically. I did not like how the thesis statement was with the introducing a speech chapter. I like to teach thesis statement with the specific purpose.

Very poor. There was very little use of color, pictures, and other graphics.

This textbook did an excellent job of appealing to college students’ interests such as O, The Oprah Magazine, Ted Talks, and popular television shows. It lacked material on international culture.

There were useful checklists/questions for students, such as the “Public Speaking Ethics” checklist and “Who is an Expert” questions. The text also included learning objectives at the beginning of each chapter, summaries throughout each chapter, and assessment questions at the end of each chapter. There were numerous websites to provide students with extra resources on a wide variety of topics.

Reviewed by Kathleen German, Full Professor, Miami University -- Oxford, Ohio on 8/21/16

Stand up, Speak--The Practice and Ethics of Public Speaking is a relatively comprehensive textbook, although it’s longer than many commercial textbooks which accounts for some of its breadth of coverage. It is highly suitable for an introductory course in public speaking that is taught from a communication theory/sciences perspective. It combines the best features of an introductory workbook such as interactive checklists and extended examples with strong features of a textbook. Among the most thorough treatments in this textbook are the ethics features (Chapter 2) which are woven throughout the book and concrete suggestions for the implementation of ethical choices in speaking. The weakest topics which might be supplemented, depending on the course emphasis, are:

* The several stress management techniques (Chapter 3), such as systematic desensitization and cognitive restructure, which are described but not in enough detail to offer viable alternatives to students. In addition, such techniques are not usually undertaken without professional guidance. * Students are not provided with practical, immediate suggestions for anxiety reduction. * Argumentation, its development and critique, is also very rudimentary. * Persuasion is introduced but not well developed. * Critical analysis of argumentation and persuasion are also very limited with no mention of fallacious reasoning etc.

There is strong treatment of contemporary behavioral theories such as cognitive dissonance, consistency theory, elaboration likelihood model, etc., but very limited recognition of rhetorical theory. If you are looking for a textbook that is well grounded in rhetorical principles, this is not it. In some cases, new language such as “temporal dimension” (p. 13) could be recognized as the traditional rhetorical “kairos” although there is no clear link. In at least one instance (p. 73), the interpretation of Aristotelian categories of speaking as three types of listeners is misleading, or at best, confusing. The historical claim that citizenship was determined by property ownership and that all property owners were prosperous is not credible (p. 73).

The use of interpersonal research and models as they are adapted to public speaking is useful. Some of this informs the development of purposes for public speaking, models of dialogic communication and principles of critical listening (p. 91). Description of various types of “noise” in listening is particularly good (p. 80) and well rooted in strong research in interpersonal communication and listening.

Why is there no permission included for Monroe’s Motivated Sequence (pp. 572+)? To my knowledge this is copyrighted information and the authors are incorrect when they write that it is included in most textbooks. It is featured only in the Monroe, Ehninger, et al. textbooks because it was developed by Alan Monroe as part of his original army officer’s training manual. Permission must be obtained from Routlege to use this model.

There are many examples, especially in the last 2/3s of the textbook. These examples are derived from contemporary issues and many of these issues such as the military “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy on sexual orientation will eventually become dated. Other examples and check sheets that ask students to review their hobbies, favorite books, classes, etc. for speech topic ideas etc. will remain viable for much longer. As always with examples from contemporary political and business speaking (Obama’s speech citations, for example) will become quickly dated. Within another 4-8 years, the typical college student will not likely remember events/leaders from their elementary and middle school years.

This textbook has an average concept load of approximately 4-6 ideas/chapter. There are many lists which appear to expand the load, but these are usually just checklists of options such as types of introductions or conclusions rather than new ideas. Often, practices such as informative speaking or types of transition are illustrated in multiple ways which is especially effective for students.

The reading level for the textbook is quite low. Most high school and college level students will have very little difficulty with it–sentences are relatively short, vocabulary is not challenging, and sentence structure is straightforward.

One difficulty in the textbook is that new vocabulary/concepts are not consistently defined clearly or in the context of the discussion. For example, “transactional” and “interactional” are used interchangeably at one point although they were established as separate concepts. The problem is further complicated as “dialogic” is introduced into the discussion. At other times, however, such as in the discussion of primary and secondary research (p. 190), the definitions are outstanding.

This textbook is both consistent with most other commercial textbooks on the market and internally consistent in its approach to teaching public speaking. The topics replicate topics covered in most other public speaking textbooks except perhaps if you are looking for more fully developed treatment of argumentation or persuasion or you want to present outlining or demonstration speaking to students.

Instructors and students will find this textbook very easy to use as distinct units or as it is presented from beginning to end. It appears to be very easy to rearrange the chapters without confusing students. In fact, I would personally use several of the later chapters much earlier in the semester and perhaps not use the extensive, although excellent, discussion of special occasion speaking at all. This textbook seems designed for such rearrangement.

The template for each chapter is consistent throughout the textbook. There are clearly delineated learning objectives, take-aways, and assessment questions for each chapter. Headings for chapters and subheadings are clear and easy to navigate. Overall, the chronology of the chapters follows the development of most public speaking courses from “why should we learn public speaking” to the steps for your first speech, to more advanced forms of speaking such as informative, persuasive, and special occasion speaking. Most commercial textbooks follow a similar formula.

Several minor problems interrupt the flow of an otherwise well-organized textbook. For example, the list of librarians and the etiquette for interacting with them is both odd and strangely placed at the beginning of the research chapter (p. 185). I’m also wondering why “Speech Preparation Time” is included in the midst of a discussion of research (p. 197) and why the statistics oriented website information is included in Chapter 8 on argumentation rather than in the previous chapter on supporting material.

Students are invited to interact with the textbook through checklists and student-friendly examples. These are well integrated into the development of stages of speech development. Infrequent diagrams and models provide additional support for concept development. Occasionally, summaries describing how lists of topics such as temporal, spatial etc. elements (Chapter 1) relate to the transaction diagram might be helpful for students who will have difficulty making these connections on their own.

The small units with key objectives listed after each one is probably helpful for students.

Occasionally words are run together such as “inlistening” (p. 73) or “shoulddo” (p. 523) although this may be the result of formatting issues while downloading.

Minor stylistic problems occur occasionally such as “hearer, that”–“hearer who” is more grammatically correct. Most of my students probably wouldn’t notice.

Many public speaking textbooks achieve the appearance of inclusion through illustrations that feature various ethnic groups, individuals using wheelchairs etc. This textbook does not have that luxury because there are no photographs other than the cover image. There is an attempt to create the facade of inclusion through the use of names such as “Jose,” “Pablo,” “Ursula,” “Fatima,” “Yukhi,” and “Juanita.” This is rather superficial. There are several examples that also use Native American culture and others. This helps recognize the potential diversity of readers and audiences. However, the most genuine attempt to stress inclusiveness occurs in the discussion of language and audience analysis. This is quite good.

This is a solid, low-level textbook that would be appropriate for either advanced high school students or entry-level college students. It represents a communication theory/sciences perspective and, although there are a few references to Aristotle, it does not represent a rhetorical approach to teaching public speaking.

Reviewed by Rosemarie Tillman, Instructor, Lane Community College on 8/21/16

I love how thoroughly this textbook covers thesis statements. I think the Chapter Exercises and Key Takeaways are especially useful for this element of a speech's introduction. I find students are often stymied by the differences between thesis statements and specific purposes, and consequently develop one or the other, but never develop very strong statements. I think it might be more comprehensive to directly deal with the five elements of orienting material rather than simply referring to five or six things that should happen within the introduction.

I did not see either an index or a glossary. Both of these features would be a benefit to this book. Many students rely heavily upon these features with the traditional textbook, most notably when they have not set aside time to complete the assigned readings. I think students' reading habits will transfer to open textbooks, and without an index or glossary, many students will be frustrated and deem the open textbook less helpful, even less user friendly.

There is no index or bibliography, so there is no way to determine research accuracy other than your personal knowledge base. Students do not usually have a very extensive knowledge base. Students might also think because the text does not offer a reference list or bibliography that they do not have to offer one with their work products.

Also the chapter on Outlining does not accurately cover outlining principles. The three major sections (introduction, body, conclusion) are not covered with the four levels (Roman numerals, capital letters, Arabic numerals, lowercase letters) working within. Neither does the significance of indentations to the flow and consistency of information that constitutes the message seem to be apparent.

I believe the content of the text is up-to-date and will remain so for a while. The fundamentals of public speaking do not readily change. Perhaps rearrangement of chapter order to that more similar to the speech making process might increase relevance. Clarifications of formatting might make technological updates easier to implement, thereby increasing longevity.

The text is understandably written. There is no restricted code that is not defined or explained. All explanations provide clarification suitable for the typical undergraduate.

Consistency rating: 3

The text does not consistently use APA's style format. When explaining oral as well as written documentation of sources for student use there seems to be adherence to APA's 6th edition. However the authors' citation of sources does not consistently or correctly offer direct in-text quotations. The citations offered in text are more appropriate for bibliographies and reference pages than chapter content. The in-text citations also misuse punctuation and provide some information that does not belong and leaves out other information that does belong. Additionally some citations provide redundant information.

Then there is inconsistency with labeling. For example, Elspeth Tilley's Ethics Pyramid is also labeled and occasionally referred to as the Ethical Pyramid.

I found the modularity effective. It seems as though customization would be effortless, particularly with the subheadings provided for each chapter. Plus if I decided to reincorporate some reading I did not assign, it appears as though that would be a naturally easy adaptation.

For the most part the layout of the text follows the speech making process. It is an easily understandable guide to being effective throughout the process. If the desire is to have the text's information flow as logically as the speech making process does rearranging the chapters so that Outlining follows Finding a Purpose and Selecting a Topic, and Creating the Body of a Speech follows Supporting Ideas and Building Arguments would set up a structure that is more similar to effective design, research, development, and practice of a speech.

Navigation is straightforward. Navigation could be more fluid with the addition of a glossary, index, and bibliography. It is refreshing that the embedded Internet links actually work and without additional navigation at a site. You are taken directly to the video, web page, blog entry, etc. referenced without needing to figure out how to access the referred resource.

More proofreading is needed. There are spacing, typographical, outlining, and grammatical errors. There needs to be some revising and editing in the formatting of the examples, citations, and outlines. Additional proofreading could easily eliminate aspects that instructors will see as distractions and clarify aspects that students may find confusing.

I think this text is culturally relevant in ways that matter to both students and instructors. Students like examples that connect to their personal lives, media, current events, and entertainment. Offering links to celebrities, politicians, professional athletes, and other news makers engaging in public speaking episodes helps students see how the skills and strategies they are learning are relevant and useful. For instructors I believe the chapter on The Importance of Language will be appreciated. It can be challenging to assist students in using and acknowledging the impact of inclusive language. Instructors' use of this chapter can meaningfully encourage students to say what they mean in ways that engage audience members and have listeners feel included in the message.

This is a solid textbook. My current institution has just implemented a prescribed traditional textbook for all of its public speaking courses. In our next review of the public speaking course, if the few issues I noted are remedied, I plan on recommending this open textbook for adoption.

Reviewed by Paul Vinelli, Instructor, Portland Community College on 8/21/16

As I was reading through the text, I considered whether it effectively complemented my lesson plans - and altogether, I feel it succeeded. The book goes into great depth in each of its major chapters, and offers students tips on how to tackle particular challenges. I can use the text as a general framework for introducing content and terminology, but ultimately the in-class exercises I’ve developed over time will be necessary to move students towards next steps.

The PDF version lacks a glossary and easily navigable Table of Contents, which is to its detriment. I’d encourage students to use the GitHub site if possible - though introducing the navigation aspects might take up valuable class time.

Altogether, I found the content to be straightforward and sensitive to a range of audiences. The authors are extremely thorough in their use of citations in the online version, but unfortunately some of these do not translate directly into the PDF. I find that they are consistently strong in attributions, offer objective examples, outline strong ethical behaviors and pose interesting questions for the reader.

Most of the text will be useful for the long-run. For instance, tips on how to grapple with anxiety or brainstorm original topics are fairly timeless. However, the authors will have to regularly add modern examples of political speech (e.g. updating for who’s in office) and cultural touchstones. The writers must be vigilant in maintaining active links - I found several “dead URLs” throughout the text, most of which direct to individually-maintained academic websites. It’s critical to keep these fresh to maintain the text’s credibility in the eyes of students and faculty.

The text is written in a clear and accessible style for students. At times, the authors overelaborate on certain points, but on the overall they do a nice job explaining topics. I feel the “Key Takeaways” are strong and straightforward - my opinion is that they could be used as models to retroactively edit several chapters in the interest of brevity.

The authors methodically define terms and explain concepts. In addition, they regularly signal what’s coming next, and do a nice job walking students through the transition from ideation to execution. The text has an even-keeled, encouraging and conversational tone, which helps keep the reader consistently engaged.

The authors do a nice job utilizing headings, subheadings and chapter designations. This was far more evident in the “online” version, where I was able to quickly jump within chapters via the Table of Contents and “Next Section” buttons. As per other textbooks I’ve used in the past, I will choose to present topics in an order I find most meaningful to my classroom. This book is organized in a way that makes this possible.

The book is capably modeled to tackle many of the fundamental topics in public speaking. I had little trouble following the authors’ arguments and ideas, and they effectively preview and review. I would prefer to see the outlining chapter introduced earlier, as this is a fundamental skill that we practice before thinking about major speech construction (often through reverse outlining). I believe that thinking broadly about speech framework before content creation is key - but that’s a personal teaching preference.

Because the text is 622 pages, I found the PDF version to be difficult to navigate on a personal computer - especially if I wanted to backtrack to a particular section. Nevertheless, the type is sufficiently large, and I can assign students chapters accordingly. Unfortunately, I cannot readily convert this to a printed text for students who prefer their readings in book form.

I believe the “online” version is far more usable. I could readily jump throughout the table of contents, and the authors did a nice job adding intra-text links. However, the plain text occasionally has formatting issues with citations. I’d suggest making the two versions consistent.

I did not find any significant grammatical errors in the book. There were some formatting issues with spacing, but I did not find these to be too distracting.

Given that the subject is Public Speaking, I feel the authors do a solid job clinically distinguishing between inclusionary and exclusionary language. However, I’d like to see more culturally engaging examples. For example, the “Presentation Aids” chapter could have used visuals representing arts and humanities in addition to the primarily scientific examples. I feel the authors could have included more examples of speech along the lines of Paulette Kelly’s “I Got Flowers Today” (page 367). It would be wonderful to use a compelling poem to demonstrate an assortment of rhetorical devices… One section I found off-putting was the example of the “entertainment speech” in Chapter 6. The speech uses an obscene acronym to create a “fictional university” that is insulting to residents of Harlem - an inappropriate and decidedly unamusing attempt at a joke. I believe the authors should choose a different speech and delete this one from the text.

I appreciate how the authors emphasized how to work with and correspond with librarians in the chapter on research. I often encourage students to begin building relationships with librarians - whether in person or virtually. It’s clear that they’ve done their due diligence in surveying experts, and I plan to reinforce this message of engagement.

While I found the research section to be authoritative, at times it turned into a bit of an information dump. It’s wonderful to see plenty of resources listed, but mentioning 9 different databases in one paragraph can be a bit excessive. Odds are my students don’t need a list of 11 major publishers in the Communication field.

However, I will say that I welcome the authors’ inclusion of full tables of citations in both MLA and APA style. I often send my students to Purdue’s “The OWL” website, and these tables serve as a strong counterpart.

Altogether, I can see myself using this book in the classroom. I was glad to see references to thinkers like Bakhtin, but I would also like to see greater attention paid to rhetorical theory. I feel that Richard Toye’s “Rhetoric: A Very Short Introduction” would be a good complement to this textbook for an additional scholarly perspective.

Reviewed by Suzanne Burdick, Community College Instructor, Portland Community College on 8/21/16

This text was very comprehensive. read more

This text was very comprehensive.

This textbook was mostly accurate, except that it did not practice what it preached by being overly wordy, rather than concise, which was ironic since brevity is a foundational trait of effective public speaking.

The book was relevant to today's students.

Clarity rating: 2

The wordiness and unnecessary length of the text detracted from its clarity.

The text was internally consistent.

Modularity rating: 1

Again, this text was unnecessarily long and cumbersome to use.

Organization/Structure/Flow rating: 1

No comment.

Reviewed by Karen Krumrey-Fulks, Lead Faculty, Lane Community College on 1/7/16

This textbook is backed with current research and great examples making it an interesting and informative read. It reaches out to students by providing relevant stories and illustrations along with bibliographic footnotes. Unfortunately, those footnotes lead to nothing. There is no bibliography or index or glossary of any sort. There is nothing at the end of the chapter, nor at the end of the book to indicate reference sources. Student who want to learn more, or to check their secondary references (as encouraged in Chapter 7 on researching the topic) are out of luck. And for those interested in chapter topics, there is no table of contents list either.

Students looking for bold-faced vocabulary words will have to highlight them on their own. The words DO exist, and are very easily understood, but the book doesn't provide that common study help that many students rely on. What is helpful though, is that each chapter section does provide a learning objectives box,and key takeaways box plus useful exercises and/or self-quizzes to test knowledge. There are also additional links to resources on the web that I am sure students and instructors will find very helpful.

In the bigger picture, this textbook might not have all of the stylistic conventions that students and instructors have learned to appreciate in a textbook, but the content covers all that I would require in a public speaking textbook and more. I was pleasantly surprised at the scope and the depth of this book. Content-wise it can stand up to anything that's out there.

The research for the book appears to be accurate, but without the bibliography it's hard to judge with certainty. In my reading there wasn't any information that drew red flags for being incorrect or biased. What did stand out was the lack of proof-reading. There were numerous places where words ran together without spacing. In the outline section, which is typically the most difficult thing for my students to learn, the formatting was horrendous. Yes, it is often difficult to get computers to format outlines correctly because of auto-correct, but students rely HEAVILY on the text when creating their own outlines, and what is shown is NOT what I want any student emulating! There needs to be some serious work done in the formatting of this chapter for the examples to be acceptable. Proofreading could move what is a good book to a desirable book.

Public speaking is not a subject that changes quickly as the generations go by. Much of what does change is stylistic or technological in nature and we just adapt the basics to the changes. It's not likely that this text will become obsolete in a short period of time. The text and chapter arrangement is relatively timeless. Even the examples that are used are explained in such a way that they will be relevant for the decade to come.

A great way to ensure relevance and longevity would be to improve the readability. If students are reading the text electronically, paragraphs need to be indented or delineated clearly. Having everything flush left, makes for a confusing read at best. When looking at screen after screen of dense wording becomes difficult for the eyes and will discourage students from spending much time with the chapters. Indenting paragraphs, creative use of "white" space, and illustrations will lengthen the amount of time a student spends with the content. As it says in chapter 15 (Presentation Aids: Design and Usage), "presenting [is] much more than just a collection of words and ideas." (pg. 473)

I found the prose of the book to be very readable and interesting. There were many vocabulary terms that were defined in such a way that I often appreciated the clarity of the definition. The examples were clear, current, and relevant. Much of the book was easy to relate to and invited the reader into the topic.

The only aspect of the book that wasn't clear was why chapter 19 (Your First Speech) exists. It's in a different typeface, and seems to be an afterthought, or maybe a conclusion to the book, because it summarizes much of what the previous chapters covered. I suspect that a simple checklist in an appendix would be a good substitution.

Moving from chapter to chapter, or even section to section within a chapter, was smooth and easy to follow. There were not any consistency issues that caused any problems for me. The authors referred back to specific sections at times to keep the topic relevant, and when checked, the references all were correct. The web links all worked as well.

In general, the modularity was effective. As I was reading, it was easy to figure out which sections or which chapters could be eliminated for my student needs without losing the integrity of the book. I liked the ways that the subheadings were labeled with numerals so that a continuity was established making it easier to realign as needed. The outline chapter uses some lengthy examples that could possibly be shortened, but overall, the modularity is stellar.

The organization of the chapters (excluding 19) makes sense and is fairly typical of most public speaking books. It's logical and follows a linear fashion from the rational of public speaking to the completion of the speech. I appreciated the review of the fundamentals of the communication process and listening at the beginning to the discussion of language choice and delivery near the end.

The structure and flow of the book could be improved for readers by proofreading and stylistic devices. Students need a bibliography and index. Bold vocabulary terms help student know what's important. Indented or other stylistic devices to delineate paragraphs. Use of white space and/or illustrations to break up the huge blocks of words.

Just as giving a speech is not just about the message, an effective book is not just getting the words on the page.

In general, the navigation throughout the book is easy. With the exception of the lack of a table of context, index, and bibliography, it is fairly easy to navigate throughout the book. The links to the web are easy to follow and working.

There were a few grammatical errors and run-on words. A good proofreader can fix these problems easily.

I was pleasantly surprised at how much I liked the written of this book. As I was reading though it, I was always thinking of ways to make it work for our public speaking classes. There are some things that I would change, and I certainly would do some proofreading and stylistic revisions, but this is a solid book that is engagingly written. I believe that with a little tweaking here and there--plus an instructors "unique" classroom presence--students would find this book appealing and useful.

Reviewed by Richard Schutta, Adjunct Professor, University of Wisconsin- Stout on 1/7/16

This is by the best text book on public speaking that I have seen recently in terms of the overall content. What I would like to see is a better glossary of key terms. Yet, what makes this a great text is the break down of key takeaways and more... read more

The thoroughness of the text is what really has captured me. The text doesn't skim over key concepts, but instead really provides a detailed explanation with numerous references to scholarly supporting material for students. The use of in-text sources provides a great illustration of the comprehensiveness of the text. This book really does a great job in touching on concepts like attention span or stages of listening that I have not seen in other public speaking books or developed out like this text.

I would have liked to see a reference or works cited page included. In this age of information I strongly encourage my students to cite all their sources. I think it should be important for a text book, especially open textbooks to include a reference page. In addition, this would help the students understand how to prepare a reference page. More importantly, also if a student wanted to look at another (s)more in-depth they would have a detailed list to refer to.

Otherwise, overall the information is accurate and students will get a wealth of information on public speaking from this text.

This book is update. In a topic like public speaking, the key concepts and methods do not change all that often, or at all. I like the various references to more current speeches (Obama) with more classic speeches (MLK's "I Have a Dream"). Often texts will update and remove "older" references, this text has found the perfect balance.

I loved that this text took the terminology of public speaking and made it understandable and easy to read at the same time. I actually found reading this text incredibly enjoyable. There isn't an overload of technical terminology without an easy to understand description to follow. Students will find this text more enjoyable to read than the "guidebooks" that are on the market.

Everything in the text flows consistently from section to section and chapter to chapter. Concepts clearly build off each other. The writing is consistent as are the use of examples and sources throughout.

I really liked the book is divided. When I teach my courses, I don't start at page one and work all the way through, I like to jump around, so the way this text is divided is perfect! More

I thought the text was consistent in organization with other texts. However, I would maybe put speaker apprehension before the chapter on ethics. Ethics is certainly important, most students coming into a public speaking class are going to be nervous and really dreading it, so I think focusing on speaking apprehension in the first or second chapter makes the most sense. This way too, the ethics chapter can lead off developing speeches.

I would also suggest a table of content be included in the PDF version that way a student can quickly find the start of a chapter or section and go directly to it.

I found no issues with the interface. Everything appeared properly and even printed clean if a student needed to print a page or pages. All the images were clean without issue.

I found a few places where spaces were missed between, but nothing else of major significance.

The text does a good job of incorporating cultural relevance into the content (e.g. Chapter 5) and provides clear examples of some words to use or not use.

Overall, I would highly recommend this book to my university and others teaching public speaking. It is by far the most comprehensive book that I personally have seen. It is easy to read, students will not get bored reading this text and it provides great examples and resources for the students and any instructor.

I would only suggest inclusion of a reference page, a glossary, and a table of contents.

Reviewed by Shannon Crawford Barniskis, Instructor, Doctoral Candidate, Consultant, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee on 1/7/16

The book is quite comprehensive, and covers similar materials to other public speaking texts. Where it stands out is in its excellent and clear advice for the students. The advice on dealing with nervousness, analyzing one’s audience and adapting the speech to them, selecting and narrowing a topic, research, building arguments, creating speeches that unroll in effective stages, building credibility, persuasion, and the physical presentation of a speech was all quite strong.

The information about different listening styles will be useful for people throughout their lives, not simply in the context of public speaking, but it will definitely help those who wonder if their audience is paying attention. The book even includes information on citation styles and research tools. It addresses a very wide variety of speaking circumstances, including key notes and toasts. I would have loved to see a specific section aimed at presenting a poster—there is little available on this topic and posters are being used more in university and academic settings. This is a type of public presentation that is challenging but rewarding if done well, since it is so interactive. When done poorly, it is a waste of everyone’s time.

Some of the less effective information centered on specific presentation aids such as slideshows—students would be better served to integrate this text with other texts for this topic, such as Duarte’s Slideology.

The book is largely accurate and unbiased. There is one area in which the content is uneven, however. The ethics discussion is sometimes thin to the point of being misleading.

For example, he book says, “One option for assessing intent is to talk with others about how ethical they think a behavior is; if you get a variety of answers, it might be a sign that the behavior is not ethical and should be avoided” (p. 19), are highly problematic from an ethical theory perspective. Issues that have a variety of ethical answers should not be avoided, but engaged with thoughtfully and using ethical frameworks to analyze. And polling one’s acquaintances about a behavior doesn’t determine its ethical basis, merely your acquaintances perspectives/cultural ideologies. Statements like this made me question this book’s aim to teach “ethical” public speaking. In addition, the discussion about means-ends is so oversimplified as to be deceptive.

However, the thorough look at the National Communication Association Credo for Ethical Communication redeemed this section. While the authors’ discussion of ethical theory is problematic, the information they give regarding information honesty, acceptance of diverse perspectives, and other parts of this credo, is sound. The checklist of ethical considerations the authors provide is particularly useful. The end-of-chapter ethical questions are interesting, and provide scenarios that offer good fodder for ethical conversations.

The book is relevant, and uses up-to-date terminology and examples, most of which will not swiftly become dated. Some references, such as to the TV show "The Office" will become dated.

Clear writing, easy to understand. The book is often funny. The examples are clear and demonstrate the points the authors intended.

The book is consistent, clear, authoritative, and well-researched and supported. It builds in a logical fashion, so that by the end of the book, the students will have a clear understanding of what it takes to be a good public speaker.

The text is easily teachable, with clearly demarcated sections that can be used separately or cumulatively. Good use of learning objectives to highlight key ideas, “key takeaways” do a wonderful job of synthesizing the information.

The exercises occasionally look like busy work, but many are quite helpful. They would be particularly useful in a class focused entirely on speaking. In a class that merely incorporates speaking as part of the learning competencies, the exercises are less important than the excellent advice on speaking. However, the book offers such a clear and compelling of the process of argumentation that I could see it being used in a writing course, or in the context of many other courses that ask students to create arguments in papers, speeches, posters, or other presentations.

The topics in the text are organized well. There are some topics I would not expect to see highlighted in a text of this nature, such as "librarians are your friends" and information on how to research a topic. These topics are so welcome and helpful that these parts of the text could be assigned in a wide variety of classes that require a research project. This really made the book stand out for me.

The book's formatting and interface are largely clear and easy to use and understand. I do find the lack of indents or spaces separating paragraphs or blockquotes, and the many other spacing errors distracting. Formatting issues signal laziness to me. I read the pdf, which should not have exhibited such formatting errors in the way a converted ebook format could.

I didn't see any grammatical errors in the text.

The books is culturally relevant in that is makes students aware of sensitive topics, ways to present them, and it challenges assumption about cultural superiority. More importantly, the book teaches sensitivity by explaining how and why students should listen ethically and be open minded. It presents audience analysis less as profiling than as ensuring the speaker is meeting the audience on respectful and sincere terms.

I teach applied public speaking in an Information Technology Ethics class, and I was intrigued by the promise of “ethics” in the title. It seemed a perfect confluence of topics to assign as a guide for my students as they prepared their speeches. While public speaking is not the main focus of this class, it is a critical skill to be learned by all of my students. Students will be wrestling with challenging ethical issues in their careers, and often have to persuade or inform their colleagues about ethical problems. I will be assigning parts of this book for future sections of this ethics class. One of the competencies for this class involves being able to communicate ethics issues clearly and convincingly. To that end, I want to ensure my students understand their ethical duty in the midst of that communication process: they must acknowledge any of their biases when possible, and seek to present as many sides of the issue as possible. The books does a particularly good job of describing exactly this process.

I have been a consultant for 14 years, and have read and used a variety of public speaking texts in my work. This book is relevant to real-world public speaking needs, while also being useful in a classroom setting.

The book provides a solid theoretical basis for the public speaking, from Shannon & Weaver’s signal/noise information theory to Bakhtin. Da Vito’s theoretical framework is a great basis for speakers to consider. Good historical grounding as well—the book notes ancient Greek and Latin speech types, for example. Later in the book, the authors usefully talk about cognitive dissonance theory and other theory that makes it difficult to persuade listeners to one’s perspective.

HIGHLIGHTS: ethical checklists, research tips, active listening and assessments of the audience.

Reviewed by Stacie Williams, Instructor, Portland Community College on 1/7/16

This text stands up very well against many popular public speaking textbooks from large publishing houses that I've used. There are well written chapters for all of the concepts covered in a 100/200 level public speaking course. In terms of content, I only have three problems. First, there is no table of contents or index. Second, there is no glossary for students to reference. And lastly, the chapter on persuasive speaking (chapter 17) is lacking some essential information about argumentation. Namely steps to constructing an argument, identifying logical fallacies, and ethos, pathos, logos appeals. I would add to the persuasion chapter before teaching from this text. In terms of content, the persuasive speaking chapter is the weakest point of this text.

The information presented in the text seems very timely. The first chapter includes information about speaking in the 21st century via media like vlogs and TEDTalks.

Theories and concepts presented in the text are very foundational to public speaking. The examples presented of these concepts and theories were timely/contemporary and are integrated in a way that would make them easy to update in the future.

Appropriate language for the level of the audience is used. The chapters were easy to read and used discipline specific language when necessary.

The format of each chapter is consistent and sets a tone of predictability in layout/design.

Some of the earlier chapters contain larger blocks of text that could benefit from being broken up. Starting in chapter 6 the examples are more clearly identified/highlighted through paragraph dates and indents. The chapters would be easy to assign in any order, or having the numbering changed to reflect the order in which readings would be assigned. The only caution is chapters are renumbered is that within the text of come chapters there are references to find more details in other chapters. Those references have the chapters numbered, so do a word find on the document to consistently replace all chapter number references.

The text was relatively easy to navigate. If each chapter had a listing of the subsections that would be easier for students to navigate.

Each chapter is broken into smaller sections. From a layout standpoint it would be nice to have a listing of all chapter subsection numbers and names to follow. It would act as a preview of what's to come in the chapter. Some of the exercises at the end of the chapters have some display problems (pdf version). There are multiple choice questions in the exercise section that are not numbered, or the response options are not presented in a consistent manner. Something that could be easily fixed in the MS Word version.

There did not appear to be any grammatical errors in the text. There were some font inconsistencies.

The section on language use did a nice job of addressing cultural relevance and sensitivity to diversity. The audience analysis chapter is inline with other industry textbooks, though I think there is room to more fully address cultural relevance and diversity. The psychographic section of the textbook could explore this topic more fully.

This textbook isn't "perfect", but I've never taught from one that provided all of the information I wanted my students to learn. What I like about this text is that it's inline with many other industry textbooks and it provides me the opportunity to customize the text by adding or removing content. I believe that it provides a great framework for instructors to build their course upon. The lack of materials like a glossary, index, or even a test bank might be a problem for a new instructor. But, if you've taught public speaking for even a year you should be able to use this text without making significant changes to your curriculum.

Reviewed by Kathryn Black Lance, Instructor, Central Lakes Community and Technical College on 1/7/16

The textbook covers all of the necessary topics included in your typical Public Speaking Introductory course to include audience analysis, ethics, listening, organization, outlining, research, language, and topic selection. It has specific chapters devoted solely to informative, persuasive, and entertaining speeches. It also had specific chapters devoted just to the Introduction and Conclusion which provided nice emphasis on the bookends of a strong speech. The only topic that was not covered in this text that is covered in my current text is Group speaking. I don't see this as a deal breaker with selecting this text, it just means that additional content would need to be added if an instructor wanted that component included. Most topics were adequately or thoroughly covered. The text needs a Table of Contents and / or an index as a part of the document.

Most information seems very accurate, unbiased, and free of factual errors. Credibility could be added to the textbook by adding background information on the authors and comprehensive reference information at the end of the textbook.

The content of Public Speaking is rather timeless, but finding examples that multiple generations are familiar with is the challenge. This is a strength of the text. It includes up to date references to include TED Talks, YouTube, and statistical predictions for 2020. It also includes live links to relevant speeches in each of the Entertainment speech (Ch 18) categories such as Tiger Wood's apology speech, Colbert's Roast of George W. Bush, and a Speech of Presentation gone wrong with Taylor Swift and Kanye West. Most of the references used throughout are still household names, but should be replaced as similar examples occur in the future. Replacing these events would be rather simple.

The text is very clear and easy to understand. It uses a reading level and vocabulary that will be appropriate for your typical beginning speech course at community and technical colleges as well as four year Universities. All jargon was appropriately explained or illustrated with timely examples or illustrations. I would like to see clearer and more complete illustrations of the Models of Communication. I prefer the traditional Transactional Model of Communication where it also includes Context, Noise, Channels, Message and illustrates the back and forth motion.

The overall feel, reading level, and conversational style of the text seemed to be consistent throughout. Visually, there seemed to be some inconsistency. My training on textbook selection encouraged us to look for a nice balance of words, pictures, and white space. I would have liked to see more illustrations in the book. There also seemed to be little white space in the text and inconsistent spacing. There was a lack of spacing between paragraphs throughout most of the book except in Chapters 6 and 7 (spacing was better in these chapters). White space offers students a psychological break and indicates a change in topics. I am not sure if it is an interface issue, but I saw this as inconsistent. I also would like to see key terms in bold or italics. I only noticed this occuring in Chapter 5 (Italics). I would like to see this occur throughout the text.

This text can easily be divided and assigned out of order or in sections. As mentioned earlier, a Table of Contents and an Index would improve the modularity of the book so students are able to find the various topics of study.

Topics are presented in a relatively logical flow. It seems that authors always struggle where to place the chapters on the specific types of speeches. It seems awkward to wait until the end, but yet there does not seem to be a natural place to insert them without breaking up the foundational skills of speech writing. These authors placed them at the end which is similar to the book I use now. I think it works, but does require that I assign a later chapter earlier in the semester in order to spread the speeches out throughout the semester. I am not sure if there is a way around that. One thing that I recommend is using varying Font size and indentation to add clarity to the organization of the individual sections (Ex. on page 92 the heading above says "6 Ways to Improve Your Critical Listening" and the subsections listing these six things use the same font, font size, and indentation so there is no differentiation between the heading and the smaller sections. Another example is on page 116.)

Most of the interface is very good. The charts and assessments are fantastic. The only interface that was off was found in several chapter assessments. It would have numbering for the first question (1.) and then the second question would be indented with no numbering. The only other question was whether the squished text was a spacing issue or an interface issue.

I did not notice any glaring grammatical issues other than the errors mentioned with the end of the chapter assessments. There were a few instances where a sentence seemed rather long, but for the most part, it was very strong grammatically.

The textbook does a good job of addressing the different facets of inclusive language, ethnic identity, and audience analysis. I was surprised that socioeconomic status was not included in one of the discussed categories in audience analysis (it is listed at the beginning but not expanded on). The textbook incorporates a good variety of ethnicities in it's examples and illustrations. I found the incorporation of the term Chronocentrism very good. It demonstrates strong cultural competence on the part of the authors. It is hard to find that term incorporated in an intercultural text much less a Public Speaking book.

Unless another text would sweep me off my feet, I am very interested in adopting this text for my course. While there are imperfections, the strengths of the book and the cost savings far outweigh the areas for improvement. The strengths that I see that have not been mentioned yet include: 1. a fantastic chapter on Ethics that incorporates the NCA Code of Ethics and strongly addresses plagiarism, 2. an important discussion on Powerless vs. powerful speech, 3. practical questionnaires and checklists that help students understand things like Who is an expert?, Is a source biased?, attributes of a strong Thesis, and the components of Monroe's Motivated Sequence., 4. Valuable links and resources (see chapters 6, 7, & 8 especially). 5. Links to actual speeches that can be used for analysis. 6. A list of objectives at the beginning of each chapter and take-aways and assessments at the end of each chapter. The only other thing that would sweeten this deal is if there was a test bank for this text. I look forward to implementing this zero cost, relevant, and engaging text into my public speaking classroom.

Reviewed by Kari Frisch, Instructor, Central Lakes College on 1/7/16

The textbook actually covered more than what I was anticipating. I falsely thought it was going to be more of a handbook or guide, something I'd use supplementaly. The actual pdf version does not start with a chapter page of contents, nor does it end with a glossary. I think the page of contents would be useful as it would help outline the content as well as help students navigate to topics more easily.

Each textbook takes a slightly different approach to communication topics. This is no exception but is more comprehensive than I anticipated. For the most part the content seems accurate and error-free. There are some numbering errors (in end-of-chapter assessments) and the occasional word misspelled (more of a spacing issue as in on page 168 "afinding"). It seemed to address some issues with cultural sensitivity (e.g. ethical language choices that include member identification/labels) and exercises that state unbiased examples like "one audience will consist of business men and women...".

Relevance/Longevity rating: 3

Some of the content and statistics are dated. Even in the book's description there is evidence that updating might need to be done very soon: "Currently, the amount of information available to people doubles every 18 months and is expected to double weekly by 2015." This is then later contradicted in chapter one, "Researcher Norman W. Edmund estimates that by 2020 the amount of knowledge in the world will double every seventy- three days". One study referenced was from 1975--maybe there is a more current study that could be used instead?

There were other references to pop culture, some newer than others, which could also help engage students but at the same time risk it being dated (Stephen Colbert Report, House). However, at other points they are referenced more statistically so perhaps it gives it a little more longevity. The latest date reference is 2011 so that's already setting it up to be a bit outdated already. There are also several links and that can be dangerous for a live site as those are beyond the authors’ scope to keep active. I noticed several broken links already (mostly with the document links).

I think the language used in this textbook is very accessible. This is one of the strengths of this particular resource. There's not very many graphics but the text is clear. It is something that college students should be able to read easily.

The framework for the resource seemed to be consistent for the most part with learning objectives identified in the sub-headings and the key takeaways listed at the end. Exercises seemed to end each sub-unit and an end-of-chapter exercise (assessment) ended each chapter. So yes, I think there was consistency in the framework.

One thought that came to me after going through the rest of these questions is the fact that the text did not highlight any terms like some textbooks do. This is sometimes a nice visual for students.

There are 19 chapters, not 18 as stated in the description. Most chapters seem to have logical groupings. They are usually broken down into sub-headings which break up the reading into more manageable chunks. Note: Chapter 19 is not a typical chapter, it is more of a summary. The authors at one point refer to it as an appendix.

Organization/Structure/Flow rating: 3

It was helpful that the text laid out the learning objectives at the start of each sub-unit heading. That helped set the framework for what followed. Likewise, the "key takeaways" at the end of units were also helpful.

The "end-of-chapter assessments" were a bit confusing and messy, especially the first time it was encountered as the heading was "chapter exercises" and it directly followed the same colored highlighted section titled "exercises". Perhaps if this had been highlighted in a different color it would have helped. There were numbering and spacing issues as well. There was only one number in the text and there were two answers in the following answer key. So that wasn't very clear either.

I also thought chapter 19, was a bit confusing with the chapter written as an introduction, "In this appendix, we have introduced you to the basics of effective public speaking...All the concepts discussed in this appendix will be more fully discussed in the other chapters in this book."

As mentioned, I would have liked to a content guide included in the online resource itself. I think this helps students see the overall outline of the resource as well as helps them navigate to specific content more quickly through the use of page number references.

Also, having just studied some ADA best practices, I wonder about the left-justifications of the margins without spacing between paragraphs. That makes the screen very text heavy on the left side without any breaks. The line spacing however does seem wide enough to meet recommendations, but I just wonder if the left alignment would be distracting to some learners. There’s also not a lot of breaks for supplemental graphics which could also appeal to your visual learners.

There's also the issue that this font is not ADA compliant. Sans-serif fonts are less distracting for those with visual impairments. The headings appear to be in a different font as they are sans serif along with the text in those highlighted areas such as the "key takeaways" and exercises, but "sidebars" (like NCA Credo on page 24) were back to a serif font. So there seems to be some inconsistency there with ADA best practices.

In the beginning the links I tried seemed to work, however, when attempting to get back to the text, the reader is sent to page one, which could be a hard adjustment for students as they then have to scroll back to find where they were at in the chapter. Closing the window closes out the whole resource (linked site and textbook pdf). So perhaps as instructors it might be helpful to suggest students copy links into a new browser window to avoid these frustrations as I don't know if anything else can be done by the publishers that would be similar to what many of us can do in an LMS or learning management system (e.g. having links open automatically in a new window). Again, I wonder about the ability of screen readers to navigate the URLS (descriptive caption verses full link address) and the need to scroll back to last spot in text.

Later I found links that were not active and would bring up error messages. For example, I could not access 4/5 templates provided in table 7.3. The issue seemed to occur more often with accessing documents versus live websites but instructors do just need to be aware of this, and try all active links you want to use if choosing this OER.

There are also times when spacing is used before subheadings and other times it does not appear to be used which can make reading more difficult. (Page 8, 13, 21, 30, 37 etc.)

As mentioned before there are numeration issues with the end-of-chapter assessments. There are also issues with spacing/indentation in those areas as well, at least when viewed on a mac. Only the first question is numbered and the spacing for answer options aren't in alignment so that's distracting. This occurs also in other parts of the text with chapter sub-units (e.g. page 198 where the only sub-point that has an indentation is "a".)

It was also very confusing in chapter 6 knowing where the written speech example started and stopped. There was no differentiation in the text, font, spacing, colored highlighting (i.e. text box), or alignment which indicating it was the referenced speech. I found that extremely confusing, especially when asked to go back and compare one speech to the other.

I did not find significant issues here.

The unit on audience analysis touches on cultural variables but could have gone into a little more depth. This would be an area I think that would need some supplemental material. For example, "group membership" did not go much further than academic major. However, I also appreciated that gender and race weren't discussed in stereotypical terms in this unit. Again, I think this is where instructors would need to add some additional discussion/resources. The text also discusses insensitive humor, which is also an important topic.

The textbook bills itself as one combining "practicality and ethics". I was anticipating that it would be more of a handbook or supplemental resource and it was much more textbook-like, if I may, than I anticipated. It covers more than the basics. There weren't many self-assessments, what was included was practical. For example, I appreciated the public speaking ethics checklist on pages 37-38. There are also some suggested exercises that could be used as good assignments or just for student reference.

I also liked that some of the exercises directly related to issues relevant to campuses. For example, the exercise on page 41 asks students to find their campus code on free speech. Keeping students engaged to their content and their context is important to me.

I do have some reservations about using this textbook from an ADA standpoint. Besides the font, links, and spacing issues mentioned already, some tables are sub-divided (as in table 9.2) which is not best practice as I understand it and can be confusing when used with a screen reader. So those ADA issues concern me. But I do have to say that doing this review changed my opinion of whether or not this OER could replace a current textbook. To be honest I thought this would be something I'd consider more as a supplemental resource. However, now, if the ADA issues were resolved I would consider using it in place of a current hardcopy textbook and add some additional resources in as supplemental to accompany this particular resource instead of vice-versa.

Reviewed by Jonna Ziniel, Department Chair, Valley City State University on 1/7/16

The text covers all major components of public speaking in general. However, there are some major components missing that you will most likely need to supplement. There is not a section on group presentations, group dynamics, or leadership. If you tend to cover communication theories in class, such as broad areas of communication, there is not a clear section for that either. It DOES cover the different models of communication, so there is some theoretical discussion in the book, but it does seem to be lacking. This is easily supplemented, but if you choose to use this book, you should plan to supplement in those key areas.

The book is clear and easy to read. It is student- friendly and has a minimal number of errors.

the book contains the standard approach to public speaking, and covers relevant topics. I think there could be some updates that include giving speeches digitally, but otherwise it does seem like a book that can last for many years without many updates.

The writing style is very accessible to students and easy to follow. The language used is vivid and descriptive.

The book uses the correct terminology and is consistent in the terms it chooses to use.

I wish the book had chapter headings on the top of each page for ease in finding each chapter. It is difficult to find a certain chapter while scrolling through the entire book, so it could be much more user friendly. The units and subunits themselves were clear and easy to understand, but the use of those units and subunits were at times difficult to follow.

The flow is fantastic and easy to follow. Students will enjoy how each chapter builds upon the previous chapter, and the class is able to move in a logical fashion by following the chapters of the book.

Navigation for the text could be much better. It is not easy to navigate through the text, and having an interactive menu would be extremely helpful.

The grammar used in the book is good. There are few spelling and grammatical errors. The key terms you would present to a public speaking class are present.

I wish the book would speak more to diversity and public speaking. It does cover SOME aspects, but this area could have been much richer and more well-defined.

This is a fantastic supplement to the classroom, and easy to use whether you are brand new to teaching the class or a seasoned professional.

Reviewed by Jeremy Estrella, Dept. Chair/ Instructor, Portland Community College on 1/7/16

The book covered many of the essential elements of a public speaking textbook. It has a thorough overview of ethics and public speaking, communication apprehension, organizing/outlining, informative speaking, visuals aids, persuasive speaking and the relavnce/importance of public speaking throughout. One foundational aspect of public speaking was missing in this book. In my review I noticed that there was little reference to the classical roots of public speaking, rhetoric and the canons of rhetoric. There was some mention of ethos, pathos and logos but these were minimal. Also the section on credibility was limited. I found the chapter on researching to be on the long side. I understand this is an important part of a speech however most public speaking classes have some sort of writing prerequisite which covers rearching themes. The part on attention getters could include more strategies.

There are many mentions of relevant communication theories which many books don't cover. The myths about communication apprehension I found to be accurate and overall the book covers many of the things I cover in my classes. I found the ethics pyramid to be a nice touch. The part on researching accurately explained how there is much more than just google as well as some of the limitations of such searches. The coverage of communication beyond public speaking was great too. Since there was little to no mention about rhetoric, I find that as a big inaccuracy since rhetoric is the foundation to this area of study.

The coverage on visual aids was very up-to-date as well as examples throughout. Some of the examples could be seen as too current and may be obsolete in a few years but periodic updating should allievate any of these concerns. I like the coverage on technological difficulties because that would always be relevant.

This book was very easy to follow and understand. Any jargon from the discipline was explained and didn't assume the student would know. Some typos here and there. I like the inclusion of theories especially theories of persuasion (ELM).

Yes, but from a very communication science basis. I would have liked to see more from rhetoric.

Yes, but I would have to reorganize it according to how I present the information in my class.

I liked how the content of a speech came before delivery but when it got to organization it was disorganized. The sections on organization seemed disorganized and jumped around a lot and could come across as confusing. I would like to see more coherence to the sections on organization. I might have to switch things around if I were to use this book. The part about Informative Speeches could have been presented earlier.

I don't know if there is another was to view the book other than pdf but I had trouble accessing the tables/figures. Also, there is no index nor table of contents in the pdf version. I know you have to access the TOC through another site but all versions of the text should have this.

Some typos. No grammatical errors noticed.

It came across to me as mostly culturally void. Most of the text read as if there was no reference to culture. There were a few examples here and there but I would have liked to see more. Some books I've reviewed have chapters dedicated to culture and how to reach your diverse audience members. It would be fine to mention cultural specifics from diverse backgrounds.

Overall, I liked this book and see myself as potentially adopting it. I liked how it had an extensive coverage of the basics of public speaking and relates many themes/ concepts back to the foundational ideas (i.e., audience analysis). There is also coverage of many things I don't see in many public speaking texts such as, dialogic theory, NCA Credo for Ethical Communication, free speech, myth about communication apprehension, oral and written style of communication, listening, tips on using notecards, using animals as visual aids (I've been asked this), public speaking pyramid and communication theories. There was, however, little to no mention about rhetoric nor credibility (I would have to supplement this information). I liked how the author included personal examples (nervousness about giving a speech). Conclusion, I would consider using this text if a few tweaks were made.

Reviewed by Sarah Zwick-Tapley, Adjunct Instructor, Colorado State University on 1/7/16

This book is an excellent introduction to public speaking. I especially appreciate that ethics is covered in addition to standard public speaking information. This book does not however have a table of contents, index, glossary or "search"... read more

All of the information and examples given are, to the best of my knowledge, accurate.

With one exception, the book is up-to-date and should be relevant for the next ten years. There is one reference to The Colbert Report. Since the publication of this book, that television show has gone off the air.

This textbook is extremely easy to read. Jargon is immediately defined. High school and college students would not have any problems in understanding the text.

The terminology and framework are consistent throughout the book.

All chapters are broken down into easily divisible subsections. It would be very easy to change the order of some chapters without creating confusion among the students.

The topics in this textbook are arranged in a very clear and logical order.

My main complaint of this textbook is its lack of a table of contents, index, glossary and "search" feature. It would be very difficult for students to quickly find specific information.

I found no grammatical errors. I did, however, find a number of spacing typos (pgs. 7, 73, 76, 108, 113, 359 and 600). I am not sure if this is a result of an error on my personal computer or an error on the part of the authors.

This textbook does an excellent job of reflecting diversity in our society. The examples used include different backgrounds, genders, races and ages. Inclusivity is one of the topics covered in this book.

It is a shame that this book has no table of contents, index, glossary or "search" feature. Otherwise, it is a very accessible, comprehensive and well-organized text.

Reviewed by Mike Baxter-Kauf, Lecturer, University of Minnesota on 6/10/15

The text does a nice job covering the mechanics of constructing a speech and has a very thorough explanation of the goals, ethics and other "preliminary questions" that go into the process. The section on speech delivery (contained entirely in one chapter of just under 40 pages) is somewhat small in comparison to the rest of the text. There are three types of specific speeches covered (speaking to persuade, inform or entertain) and while each is dealt with in a good amount of detail, some may want more of these "specific speeches" included.

Of course, the questions here are going to be less about the literal accuracy of facts/figures and more about the way the text aligns with one's own opinions of what constitutes a valid and well composed speech. Overall, I think the text is unlikely to substantially contradict anyone's instructional claims. Take, as an example, the section on "the purposes of speaking." While there may be more detail in terms of breaking down the purposes than any given instructor would mention in class, the overall questions of purpose (why do we speak?) and the importance of purpose (both in terms of audience relationship and the analysis of a given speaker) are both general and still very useful. I did not feel any particular bias (besides one to the importance and relevance of speech making, which I would expect from any such textbook) while reading the book.

There is nothing that will make the text become obsolete or useless at any point in the immediate future. Examples are relatively timeless and will be easily updatable with little need to change much of the underlying text. Many examples are related to the regular occurrences of college life (class, roommates, homework, social events) and others to political questions unlikely to disappear in the near future (health care, immigration, popular trust/distrust of politicians). The book does an excellent job maintaining a balance of "up to date" and "will soon be out of date."

Even very late in the text, there is very little jargon that would interfere with a student's ability to read and understand. This is especially useful since so many courses would likely not use the text from beginning to end directly, but likely jump around or include sections on informative or persuasive speaking when those first come up in class (even though they are at the end of the text). The writing style is very clear, if anything, it could be criticized for remaining too simplistic with a very basic but certainly very clear sentence structure. Since public speaking courses are often introductory level for beginning undergraduates, this is not much of a problem. There is a clear difference between the way most of the speeches are written (with more advanced and intricate prose) and the way the instruction itself appears (basic and straightforward). That could be considered good or bad, I found it mostly neutral.

I did not find any instances within the text where there was inconsistency in the terminology or framework of the text. The tone is continually instructive, it retains a solid dialogic and pedagogical relationship with the reader.

The large-scale chapters are well divided and easy to use. While the chapters build well on one another, I think there would be little to no confusion caused by jumping around the book. There are smaller chapter divisions (which are somewhat hard to find without a more explicit table of context or index) but which could probably be used in much the same way if someone cared to define reading assignments that precisely.

It is hard to determine where chapters about specific speeches should fall within an overall text. The authors of this book have chosen to place them at the end, which may make sense, but probably makes it difficult to assign the book in order, since likely some of these speeches need to come earlier on. The progression of the chapters makes logical sense beyond that, moving from the pre-requisites of speaking, to the process of topic selection, audience analysis, speech construction and delivery. Some increased discussion of ways the text could be used may be helpful to guide instructors and make their adoption of the book for their course more seamless.

There are no substantial issues that make anything unusable or unreadable. I was not distracted. The text, however, does not feel like a traditionally published text book, it feels notably lacking in images, color and typesetting. These are minor issues for me, in comparison to its usability, intelligence and cost, but should be noted. I cannot imagine it confusing the reader, but it may engage them less if they are students not used to the extreme "textually-centric" notion of the book.

Any grammatical issues were extremely minor. I did not notice anything routine or systematic. At no point did the grammar interfere with my ability to understand the meaning of the text.

I did not find any actively offensive issues in the book. There seemed to be little discussion of questions including gender, race, class, sex, ability in a way that could be productive. The text seems to take a traditionally "neutral" stance by not addressing these issues and trying not to alienate any readers of the "public speaking advice." The book does make good decisions regarding the use of inclusive language and the examples do seem to use individuals with traditionally gender-diverse names. The examples of famous speeches do include non-white speakers, but again, often speaking on relatively innocuous questions. It is not retrogressive, it is not revolutionary.

Reviewed by David Askay, Assistant Professor, California Polytechnic State University on 7/15/14

The textbook provides a comprehensive discussion of topics related to public speaking, including focused chapters on commonly assigned informative, persuasive, and entertaining speeches. Content is consistent with other textbooks with chapters devoted to ethics, listening, research, outlining, organizing, and language. One topic that is not included is discussion of small group communication. While many public speaking courses do not cover this material, those teaching a hybrid class will need to find supplementary material. That said, a hybrid class may benefit greatly from using this textbook to cover public speaking, while turning to other resources for other topics (e.g., interpersonal, organizational, small group communication, etc.). Lacking from the text is a index, which may limit the ability of students to efficiently look up and review certain topics. While adding an index would be beneficial, it is worth noting that the entire textbook is searchable.

Content Accuracy rating: 2

The textbook provides an accurate introduction to public speaking. I did note that while sources are clearly cited in-text, a comprehensive bibliography is not provided at the end. This could be useful not only for providing examples of citations for students, but also for aiding them in finding referenced material.

Public speaking has been largely taught with the same concepts for thousands of years. While there tends not to be huge revisions or additions to public speaking, the greater challenge that many instructors find it reaching the contemporary audience. This text includes references to timely and engaging examples (e.g., Avenue Q, TED Talks, Randy Pausch's "Last Lecture"), to which students in my classes have responded favorably. Also included are hyperlinks to online references that students may find useful for developing their speeches and finding examples.

The writing of the textbook comes across as clear and straightforward, even humorous at times. Chapters begin with learning objectives. Jargon is well described, but not appearing in the text are the familiar bold definitions that many students may be accustomed to. Contemporary examples are often referenced when introducing new terms, which helps to situate the knowledge. Each chapter also concludes with key takeaways, exercises, and assessments to aid students in testing their understanding.

Chapters are presented in a logical order that builds on previous chapters.

Each chapter is divided into effectively smaller sections, which allows for tailoring of reading assignments. Paragraphs, headings and subheadings are used extensively and effectively. When self-references to the text are made, a hyperlink is provided to guide students to this area. While each chapter is divided into topics, there is no of table of contents at the beginning. Additionally, there is no list of sub-sections within each chapter. This may impede the ability to both students and instructors to quickly find and assign relevant sections of the book. Stronger chapter outlining, table of contents, and page numbers would be a welcome addition to this text.

Topics are presenting in a logical order that builds on each other. Chapters begin with learning objectives and introduce the need to understand the material. Subheadings help to guide the reader through topics and make clear visible delineations of the content. As mentioned before, a more detailed table of contents for the book and each chapter would aid in the organization.

The interface of the textbook is readable, but the lack of a professional typeset is evident. At times, font sizes and types are inconsistent and spacing between sections could be enhanced. The formatting of tables are barebones, sometimes extending beyond single page. The spacing of table headings likewise extend beyond a single line. Paragraphs tend not to be indented and spacing between paragraphs is small, leading to a squished appearance. This can be distracting and sometimes difficult to read. While the content is good, the design does leave something to be desired.

The textbook comes across as straightforward and contains only occasional typos or grammatical errors

The textbook explicitly covers cultural dimensions of public speaking and audience analysis. Examples are inclusive of various political orientations, races, cultures, and ethnicities, although

Reviewed by Michelle Lutz, Adjunct English and Communication Professor, University of Northwestern - St. Paul on 7/15/14

This wonderful book goes well beyond any communication text I have read or used as a professor. In addition to covering the basics, it includes well-developed insights, ideas, and examples for how to create and deliver ethical and quality speeches in a meaningful format. There are 18 chapters that deal with everything from "The Importance of Listening" to "Supporting Ideas and Building Arguments" to "Concluding with Power" and so much more. Learning objective sections are included at the beginning of each chapter, and each chapter ends with "Key Take Aways" sections that summarize the main points just covered. These are key features that students will greatly appreciate as they process through the content. Numerous online sources are referenced and made available with just a click of a link. Additionally, each chapter includes optional exercises, end of chapter assessments, and answer keys. This is a very comprehensive text that includes a broad spectrum of speech topics.

The content is current and accurate. Moreover, the text actually taught the importance of using up-to-date and credible sources when researching and preparing for a speech. For example, I appreciated the teaching on the "Ethical Pyramid" (end, mean and intent) which was thoroughly explained in a way that showed the value and importance of being truly honest with both content and delivery. I appreciated the precision that was used throughout the text--such as including key questions for helping students to find a topic and steps for how to find current academic data. I also found the high quality techniques for how to avoid plagiarism and properly cite sources, and the multiple approaches for writing an ethical speech from beginning to end to be valuable.

The text covers tried and true speech techniques and approaches, but it is not dry, and the authors' insights and analogies are refreshing. I appreciated how they covered areas that are frequently skimmed over in other textbooks. For example, they discussed dimensions where your communication takes places such as temporal, physical and social-psychological dimensions. On p. 15 they say, "You have to know the types of people in your audience and how they react to a wide range of messages." I found the points made in this section exceptionally relevant for students who often miss their audience. I also really liked the section on communication apprehension (stage fright), and how they intelligently explained away the myths of those who suffer from speech anxiety and then offered helpful tips for how to overcome it. Stage fright is something many students struggle with, and this section is just one great example of how this text has enormous validity and permanency. As time goes on, this text will inevitably need up-date various websites, but other than that, I don't see any changes that will be needed for quite a while.

This text is clearly written with solid illustrations and examples. I believe students will find it much more engaging than the average textbook because the analogies are interesting - not bland like other textbooks I've reviewed. The authors defer (and rightly so) to the NCA Credo on Ethical Communication for guiding the study of communication and ethical principles. This further assists in creating a clear foundation that will help show students how honesty can be integrated into the research, writing, and giving of their speeches.

The lay-out and structure of the text is consistent and perfect for classroom use. I plan to incorporate some of the exercises and end of chapter assessments into my future class discussions. I also appreciate the fact that throughout the text, they refer to ideas that will be explored in future chapters such as "We will discuss these fallacies in more detail in Chapter 8 - 'Supporting Ideas and Building Arguments'." This was helpful because if you wanted to skip ahead and read more about fallacies (or whatever topic was being discussed), you knew right where to find it.

The design of the text clearly shows the beginning and end of each chapter. It is easily dividable, and you can pick and choose which chapters or sections to use or not to use. I like that it is broken down into four broader categories: why public speaking is relevant, how to mentally and physically prepare for giving a speech, how to design and structure a speech, and how to present a quality speech in an ethical fashion.

The text is arranged in a consistent and highly organized way that helps the reader stay interested and yet focused on the objectives and topics at hand. Each chapter flows nicely from one topic to the next and ends with a summary and some valuable exercises before moving onto the next.

I did not experience any interface issues, and nor did I notice anything that might be confusing to students. The images and graphs were colorful and visually appealing. The font styles and sizes used worked well, and there was not anything that distracted me from the text.

I did find a few places where a comma should have been used and where words were squished together and a space was necessary (perhaps this is an interface issue - not sure). However, overall, the text is well written both style-wise and mechanically.

I did not find the text to be insensitive or culturally offensive in any way. In fact there is an entire section devoted to using inclusive language, and they discuss the National Council of Teachers of guidelines for using gender-fair language that not only helps one convey what he/she means but helps audience members feel included in the speech giver's message. I also appreciated that in the final chapter, they have links to youtube clips of famous people giving speeches for various occasions. By clicking on the link, students can see a roast of President George W. Bush done by Stephen Colbert, a eulogy for the late Rosa Parks by Barack Obama, and Derek Jeter's farewell to Yankee Stadium to name a few. Students know these famous people and appreciate the opportunity to see them give speeches because they are part of their current culture.

I highly recommend this text, and I plan to use it in a debate class that I teach. I like that it covers the basics (but in a refreshing way) and yet so much more. The material is current, intelligent, and well-researched, and it includes an abundance of sources, exercises to use in class and a great deal of helpful and insightful advice on how to approach researching, writing, and giving an ethically sound speech.

Chapter 1: Why Public Speaking Matters Today
Chapter 2: Ethics Matters: Understanding the Ethics of Public Speaking
Chapter 3: Speaking Confidently
Chapter 4: The Importance of Listening
Chapter 5: Audience Analysis
Chapter 6: Finding a Purpose and Selecting a Topic
Chapter 7: Researching Your Speech
Chapter 8: Supporting Ideas and Building Arguments
Chapter 9: Introductions Matter: How to Begin a Speech Effectively
Chapter 10: Creating the Body of a Speech
Chapter 11: Concluding with Power
Chapter 12: Outlining
Chapter 13: The Importance of Language
Chapter 14: Delivering the Speech
Chapter 15: Presentation Aids: Design and Usage
Chapter 16: Informative Speaking
Chapter 17: Persuasive Speaking
Chapter 18: Speaking to Entertain

Ancillary Material

About the book.

Stand up, Speak out: The Practice and Ethics of Public Speaking features two key themes. First it focuses on helping students become more seasoned and polished public speakers, and second is its emphasis on ethics in communication. It is this practical approach and integrated ethical coverage that sets Stand up, Speak out: The Practice and Ethics of Public Speaking apart from the other texts in this market.

Contribute to this Page

5.2 Ethics in Public Speaking

The study of ethics in human communication is hardly a recent endeavor. One of the earliest discussions of ethics in communication (and particularly in public speaking) was conducted by the ancient Greek philosopher Plato in his dialogue Phaedrus . In the centuries since Plato’s time, an entire subfield within the discipline of human communication has developed to explain and understand communication ethics.

Communication Code of Ethics

In 1999, the National Communication Association officially adopted the Credo for Ethical Communication (see the text box). Ultimately, the NCA Credo for Ethical Communication is a set of beliefs communication scholars have about the ethics of human communication.

National Communication Association Credo for Ethical Communication

Questions of right and wrong arise whenever people communicate. Ethical communication is fundamental to responsible thinking, decision-making, and the development of relationships and communities within and across contexts, cultures, channels, and media. Moreover, ethical communication enhances human worth and dignity by fostering truthfulness, fairness, responsibility, personal integrity, and respect for self and others. We believe that unethical communication threatens the quality of all communication and consequently the well-being of individuals and the society in which we live. Therefore we, the members of the National Communication Association, endorse and are committed to practicing the following principles of ethical communication:

We advocate truthfulness, accuracy, honesty, and reason as essential to the integrity of communication.
We endorse freedom of expression, diversity of perspective, and tolerance of dissent to achieve the informed and responsible decision-making fundamental to a civil society.
We strive to understand and respect other communicators before evaluating and responding to their messages.
We promote access to communication resources and opportunities as necessary to fulfill human potential and contribute to the well-being of families, communities, and society.
We promote communication climates of caring and mutual understanding that respect the unique needs and characteristics of individual communicators.
We condemn communication that degrades individuals and humanity through distortion, intimidation, coercion, and violence, and through the expression of intolerance and hatred.
We are committed to the courageous expression of personal in pursuit of fairness and justice.
We advocate sharing information, opinions, and feelings when facing significant choices while also respecting privacy and confidentiality.
We accept responsibility for the short‐ and long‐term consequences for our own communication and expect the same of others.

Applying the NCA Credo to Public Speaking

The NCA Credo for Ethical Communication is designed to inspire discussions of ethics related to all aspects of human communication. For our purposes, we want to think about each of these principles in terms of how they affect public speaking.

We Advocate Truthfulness, Accuracy, Honesty, and Reason as Essential to the Integrity of Communication

It is also important to be honest about where all your information comes from in a speech. As speakers, examine your information sources and determine whether they are biased or have hidden agendas. For example, you are not likely to get accurate information about nonwhite individuals from a neo-Nazi website. While you may not know all your sources of information firsthand, you should attempt to find objective sources that do not have an overt or covert agenda that skews the argument you are making. The second part of information honesty is to fully disclose where we obtain the information in our speeches. As ethical speakers, it is important to always cite your sources of information within the body of a speech. Whether you conducted an interview or read a newspaper article, you must tell your listeners where the information came from. Using someone else’s words or ideas without giving credit is called plagiarism . The word “plagiarism” stems from the Latin word plagiaries , or kidnapper. American Psychological Association states in its publication manual that ethical speakers do not claim “words and ideas of another as their own; they give credit where credit is due” (American Psychological Association, 2001). In the previous sentence, we placed quotation marks around the sentence to indicate that the words came from the American Psychological Association and not from us. When speaking informally, people sometimes use “air quotes” to signal direct quotations—but this is not a recommended technique in public speaking. Instead, speakers need to verbally tell an audience when they are using someone else’s information. The consequences for failing to cite sources during public speeches can be substantial. When President Joseph Biden was a Senator running for President of the United States in 1988, reporters found that he had plagiarized portions of his stump speech from British politician Neil Kinnock. Biden was forced to drop out of the race as a result. More recently, the student newspaper at Malone University in Ohio alleged that the university president, Gary W. Streit, had plagiarized material in a public speech. Streit retired abruptly as a result.

Even if you are not running for President of the United States or serving as a college president, citing sources is important to you as a student. Many universities and high schools have policies that include dismissal from the institution for student plagiarism of academic work, including public speeches. Failing to cite your sources might result, at best, in lower credibility with your audience and, at worst, in a failing grade on your assignment or expulsion from your school. We cannot emphasize enough the importance of giving credit to the speakers and authors whose ideas we pass on within our own speeches and writing.

Speakers tend to fall into one of three major traps with plagiarism. The first trap is failing to tell the audience the source of a direct quotation. In the previous paragraph, we used a direct quotation from the American Psychological Association; if we had not used the quotation marks and clearly listed where the cited material came from, you, as a reader, wouldn’t have known the source of that information. To avoid plagiarism, you always need to tell your audience when you are directly quoting information within a speech.

The second plagiarism trap public speakers fall into is paraphrasing what someone else said or wrote without giving credit to the speaker or author. For example, you may have read a book and learned that there are three types of schoolyard bullying. In the middle of your speech, you talk about those three types of schoolyard bullying. If you do not tell your audience where you found that information, you are plagiarizing. Typically, the only information you do not need to cite is information that is general knowledge. General knowledge is information that is publicly available and widely known by a large segment of society. For example, you would not need to provide a citation within a speech for the name of Delaware’s capital. Although many people do not know the capital of Delaware without looking it up, this information is publicly available and easily accessible, so assigning credit to one specific source is not useful or necessary.

The third plagiarism trap that speakers fall into is re-citing someone else’s sources within a speech. To explain this problem, let’s look at a brief segment from a research paper written by Wrench, DiMartino, Ramirez, Oviedio, and Tesfamariam:

The main character on the hit Fox television show House , Dr. Gregory House, has one basic mantra, “It’s a basic truth of the human condition that everybody lies. The only variable is about what” (Shore & Barclay, 2005). This notion that “everybody lies” is so persistent in the series that t-shirts have been printed with the slogan. Surprisingly, research has shown that most people do lie during interpersonal interactions to some degree. In a study conducted by Turner, Edgley, and Olmstead (1975), the researchers had 130 participants record their own conversations with others. After recording these conversations, the participants then examined the truthfulness of the statements within the interactions. Only 38.5% of the statements made during these interactions were labeled as “completely honest.”

In this example, we see that the authors of this paragraph cited information from two external sources: Shore and Barclay and Tummer, Edgley, and Olmstead. These two groups of authors are given credit for their ideas. The authors make it clear that they did not produce the television show House or conduct the study that found that only 38.5 percent of statements were completely honest. Instead, these authors cited information found in two other locations. This type of citation is appropriate.

However, if a speaker read the paragraph and said the following during a speech, it would be plagiarism: “According to Wrench DiMartino, Ramirez, Oviedio, and Tesfamariam, in a study of 130 participants, only 38.5 percent of the responses were completely honest.” In this case, the speaker is attributing the information cited to the authors of the paragraph, which is not accurate. If you want to cite the information within your speech, you need to read the original article by Turner, Edgley, and Olmstead and cite that information yourself.

There are two main reasons we examine and cite the original source. First, Wrench, DiMartino, Ramirez, Oviedio, and Tesfamariam may have mistyped the information. Suppose the study by Turner, Edgley, and Olstead actually found that 58.5 percent of the responses were completely honest. If you cited the revised number (38.5 percent) from the paragraph, you would be further spreading incorrect information.

The second reason we do not re-cite someone else’s sources within our speeches is because it’s intellectually dishonest. You owe your listeners an honest description of where the facts you are relating came from, not just the name of an author who cited those facts. It is more work to trace the original source of a fact or statistic, but by doing that extra work you can avoid this plagiarism trap.

We Endorse Freedom of Expression, Diversity of Perspective, and Tolerance of Dissent to Achieve the Informed and Responsible Decision-Making Fundamental to a Civil Society

If everyone only listened to one source of information, then we would be easily manipulated and controlled. For this reason, we believe that individuals should be willing to listen to a range of speakers on a given subject. As listeners or consumers of communication, we should realize that this diversity of perspectives enables us to be more fully informed on a subject. Imagine voting in an election after listening only to the campaign speeches of one candidate. The perspective of that candidate would be so narrow that you would have no way to accurately understand and assess the issues at hand or the strengths and weaknesses of the opposing candidates. Unfortunately, some voters do limit themselves to listening only to their candidate of choice and, as a result, base their voting decisions on incomplete—and often inaccurate—information.

Listening to diverse perspectives includes being willing to hear dissenting voices. Dissent is by nature uncomfortable, as it entails expressing opposition to authority or the majority position, often in very unflattering terms. Legal scholar Steven H. Shiffrin has argued in favor of some symbolic speech (e.g., flag burning) because we as a society value the ability of anyone to express their dissent against the will and ideas of the majority (Shiffrin, 1999). Ethical communicators will be receptive to dissent, no matter how strongly they may disagree with the speaker’s message because they realize that a society that forbids dissent cannot function democratically. Ultimately, honoring free speech and seeking out a variety of perspectives is very important for all listeners.

We Strive to Understand and Respect Other Communicators before Evaluating and Responding to Their Messages

This is another ethical characteristic that is specifically directed at receivers of a message. As listeners, we often let our perceptions of a speaker’s nonverbal behavior—his or her appearance, posture, mannerisms, eye contact, and so on—determine our opinions about a message before the speaker has said a word. We may also find ourselves judging a speaker based on information we have heard about him or her from other people. Perhaps you have heard from other students that a particular teacher is a really boring lecturer or is really entertaining in class. Even though you do not have personal knowledge, you may prejudge the teacher and his or her message based on information you have been given from others. The NCA credo reminds us that to be ethical listeners, we need to avoid such judgments and instead make an effort to listen respectfully; only when we have understood a speaker’s viewpoint are we ready to begin forming our opinions of the message.

Listeners should try to objectively analyze the content and arguments within a speech before deciding how to respond. Especially when we disagree with a speaker, we might find it difficult to listen to the content of the speech and, instead, work on creating a rebuttal the entire time the speaker is talking. When this happens, we do not strive to understand the speaker and do not respect the speaker.

Of course, this does not just affect the listener in the public speaking situation. As speakers, we are often called upon to evaluate and refute potential arguments against our positions. While we always want our speeches to be as persuasive as possible, we do ourselves and our audiences a disservice when we downplay, distort, or refuse to mention important arguments from the opposing side. Fairly researching and evaluating counterarguments is an important ethical obligation for the public speaker.

We Promote Access to Communication Resources and Opportunities as Necessary to Fulfill Human Potential and Contribute to the Well-Being of Families, Communities, and Society

Human communication is a skill that can and should be taught. We strongly believe that you can become a better, more ethical speaker. One of the reasons the authors of this book teach courses in public speaking and wrote this college textbook on public speaking is that we, as communication professionals, have an ethical obligation to provide others, including students like you, with resources and opportunities to become better speakers.

We Promote Communication Climates of Caring and Mutual Understanding That Respect the Unique Needs and Characteristics of Individual Communicators

Second, it is important for a speaker to create an atmosphere of mutual understanding. To do this, you should first learn as much as possible about your audience, a process called audience analysis.

To create a climate of caring and mutual respect, it is important for us as speakers to be open with our audiences so that our intentions and perceptions are clear. Nothing alienates an audience faster than a speaker with a hidden agenda unrelated to the stated purpose of the speech. One of our coauthors once listened to a speaker give a two-hour talk, allegedly about workplace wellness, which actually turned out to be an infomercial for the speaker’s weight-loss program. In this case, the speaker clearly had a hidden (or not-so-hidden) agenda, which made the audience feel disrespected.

We Condemn Communication That Degrades Individuals and Humanity through Distortion, Intimidation, Coercion, and Violence and through the Expression of Intolerance and Hatred

Distortion occurs when someone purposefully twists information in a way that detracts from its original meaning. Unfortunately, some speakers take information and use it in a manner that is not in the spirit of the original information. One place we see distortion frequently is in the political context, where politicians cite a statistic or the results of a study and either completely alter the information or use it in a deceptive manner. FactCheck.org , a project of the Annenberg Public Policy Center, and the St. Petersburg Times’s Politifact are nonpartisan organizations devoted to analyzing political messages and demonstrating how information has been distorted.

Expressions of intolerance and hatred that are to be avoided include using ageist , heterosexist , racist , sexist , and any other form of speech that demeans or belittles a group of people. Hate speech from all sides of the political spectrum in our society is detrimental to ethical communication. As such, we as speakers should be acutely aware of how an audience may perceive words that could be considered bigoted. For example, suppose a school board official involved in budget negotiations used the word “shekels” to refer to money, which he believes the teachers’ union should be willing to give up (Associated Press, 2011). The remark would be likely to prompt accusations of anti-Semitism and to distract listeners from any constructive suggestions the official might have for resolving budget issues. Although the official might insist that he meant no offense, he damaged the ethical climate of the budget debate by using a word associated with bigotry.

At the same time, it is important for listeners to pay attention to expressions of intolerance or hatred. Extremist speakers sometimes attempt to disguise their true agendas by avoiding bigoted “buzzwords” and using mild-sounding terms instead. For example, a speaker advocating the overthrow of a government might use the term “regime change” instead of “revolution”; similarly, proponents of genocide in various parts of the world have used the term “ethnic cleansing” instead of “extermination.” By listening critically to the gist of a speaker’s message as well as the specific language he or she uses, we can see how that speaker views the world.

We Are Committed to the Courageous Expression of Personal Convictions in Pursuit of Fairness and Justice

We believe that finding and bringing to light situations of inequality and injustice within our society is important. Public speaking has been used throughout history to point out inequality and injustice, from Patrick Henry arguing against the way the English government treated the American colonists and Sojourner Truth describing the evils of slavery to Martin Luther King Jr.’s “I Have a Dream” speech and Army Lt. Dan Choi’s speeches arguing that the military’s “Don’t ask, don’t tell” policy is unjust. Many social justice movements have started because young public speakers have decided to stand up for what they believe is fair and just.

We Advocate Sharing Information, Opinions, and Feelings When Facing Significant Choices While Also Respecting Privacy and Confidentiality

This ethical obligation even has legal implications in many government and corporate contexts. For example, individuals who work for the Central Intelligence Agency are legally precluded from discussing their work in public without prior review by the agency. And companies such as Google also have policies requiring employees to seek permission before engaging in public speaking in which sensitive information might be leaked.

We Accept Responsibility for the Short- and Long-Term Consequences of Our Own Communication and Expect the Same of Others

The last statement of NCA’s ethical credo may be the most important one. We live in a society where a speaker’s message can literally be heard around the world in a matter of minutes, thanks to our global communication networks. Extreme remarks made by politicians, media commentators, and celebrities, as well as ordinary people, can unexpectedly “go viral” with regrettable consequences. It is not unusual to see situations where a speaker talks hatefully about a specific group, but when one of the speaker’s listeners violently attacks a member of the group, the speaker insists that he or she had no way of knowing that this could possibly have happened. Washing one’s hands of responsibility is unacceptable: all speakers should accept responsibility for the short-term and long-term consequences of their speeches. Although it is certainly not always the speaker’s fault if someone commits an act of violence, the speaker should take responsibility for her or his role in the situation. This process involves being truly reflective and willing to examine how one’s speech could have tragic consequences. Furthermore, attempting to persuade a group of people to take any action means you should make sure that you understand the consequences of that action. Whether you are persuading people to vote for a political candidate or just encouraging them to lose weight, you should know what the short-term and long-term consequences of that decision could be. While our predictions of short-term and long-term consequences may not always be right, we have an ethical duty to at least think through the possible consequences of our speeches and the actions we encourage.

Practicing Ethical Public Speaking

Thus far in this section, we’ve introduced you to the basics of thinking through the ethics of public speaking. Knowing about ethics is essential, but even more important to being an ethical public speaker is putting that knowledge into practice by thinking through possible ethical pitfalls prior to standing up and speaking out. Table 5.1 “Public Speaking Ethics Checklist” is a checklist based on our discussion in this chapter to help you think through some of these issues.

Table 5.1 Public Speaking Ethics Checklist

Instructions: For each of the following ethical issues, check either “true” or “false.”

I have knowingly added information within my speech that is false.
I have attempted to persuade people by unnecessarily tapping into emotion rather than logic.
I have not clearly cited all the information within my speech.
I do not know who my sources of information are or what makes my sources credible.
I wrote my speech based on my own interests and really haven’t thought much about my audience.
I haven’t really thought much about my audience’s needs and desires.
I have altered some of the facts in my speech to help me be more persuasive.
Some of the language in my speech may be considered bigoted.
My goal is to manipulate my audience to my point of view.
I sometimes blend in my personal opinions when discussing actual facts during the speech.
I don’t bother to distinguish between the two during my speech.
I’ve used information in my speech from a friend or colleague that probably shouldn’t be repeated.
I’m using information in my speech that a source gave me even though it was technically “off the record.”
It’s just a speech. I really don’t care what someone does with the information when I’m done speaking.
I haven’t really thought about the short- or long-term consequences of my speech. Scoring: For ethical purposes, all your answers should have been “false.”

using someone else’s words or ideas without giving credit

according to Merriam Webster’s Dictionary of Law, free speech entails “the right to express information, ideas, and opinions free of government restrictions based on content and subject only to reasonable limitations (as the power of the government to avoid a clear and present danger) esp. as guaranteed by the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution” (Freedom of speech)

occurs when someone purposefully twists information in a way that detracts from its original meaning

prejudice or discrimination against a particular age-group and especially the elderly

a system of attitudes, bias, and discrimination in favor of female–male sexuality and relationships

a belief that race is a fundamental determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race

prejudice or discrimination based on sex

It’s About Them: Public Speaking in the 21st Century Copyright © 2022 by LOUIS: The Louisiana Library Network is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

2 Chapter 2: Ethics

Lauren Rome, College of the Canyons

Adapted by William Kelvin, Professor of Communication Studies, Florida SouthWestern State College

Figure 2.1: Ethics 1

Introduction

The explosion of the internet and the constant presence of media have made it impossible to avoid receiving messages. We see messages when we look on social media, when we attend class, when we watch the news, and even when we talk to our friends. I’m willing to bet you haven’t once asked yourself, “are these messages ethical?” And why would you? We don’t tend to live our lives constantly asking ourselves that question. We do, however, ask ourselves if we believe and agree with the information. Both of these questions correspond to the principles of ethical public speaking. Throughout this chapter, we will examine ethics in public speaking, and how it relates to your upcoming speeches.

The Importance of Ethics

When it comes to public speaking, your goal is to communicate a message to your audience. In many cases, this could mean you are simply conveying information and sharing knowledge; other times this could mean you’re actively persuading your audience to change their minds, behaviors, or beliefs. As the person communicating the message, you are tasked with a significant ethical dilemma, whether you are aware of it or not.

In general, ethics examines what society deems as issues of morality, such as what is right, fair, or just. When looking at ethics from a personal standpoint, it guides how you “should” behave in various situations. History is ripe with great speakers who used ethical and passionate messages to make a positive impact or bring people together. Some examples include Martin Luther King Jr., Malala Yousafzai, Mohandas Gandhi, and Maya Angelou. On the other hand, there are cases of notorious speakers who used the power of public speech unethically, bringing about chaos, destruction, or heartbreak. Infamous speakers like Adolf Hitler, Benito Mussolini, Vladimir Putin, and Joseph McCarthy serve as stark reminders of the harm of unethical public speech.

Ethical Responsibilities of the Speaker

When choosing to use your voice in a public setting, you will face many ethical considerations because you are speaking to actual people, the audience. As such, you need to make careful decisions when determining your goal, your word choice, how you will accomplish your goal, and giving credit where it is due. Ultimately, ethics in public speaking is about conveying messages honestly, thoughtfully, and responsibly.

Identify Your Speech Goals

Ethics places emphasis on the means used to secure the goal, rather than on achieving the goal, or end, itself. Any audience will be more receptive to your message if you use ethical standards to determine your speech goals. Think about why you are speaking to the audience and what you hope to accomplish. This will allow you to choose the most ethical strategies for achieving your goal.

Have you ever tried asking someone for a favor? Maybe you needed your sibling or roommate to take out the trash. The goal is to get them to complete the task for you, but what method will you use to accomplish this goal? One way may be to explain how busy you are working on an outline for your upcoming speech. Another example would be to strike a deal and offer to take the trash out twice in a row. Or, you could guilt them into taking out the trash because they borrowed your computer last week. Finally, you could lie and say you feel unwell and so you are unable to take the trash out. Any method has the potential to bring about the result, but I’m sure you’re able to identify which paths feel the least ethical; no one likes to be guilted or tricked into doing something.

Send Honest Messages

Have you ever heard the saying “honesty is the best policy?” Although this is most often associated with people telling lies, it also applies to the messages you choose to send in your speeches. Ethical speakers do not deceive their audience. Instead, they present verifiable and researched facts. Ethical speakers should not disguise opinions as fact. All content must come from a place of authenticity. Authenticity builds credibility.

Credibility is a complex concept with several facets. In public speaking, credibility is often referred to as the ancient Greek word ethos , which includes your competence, based on your authority and currency on a subject, as well as your trustworthiness. It’s something that is built through your words and actions. Credibility can become damaged when it is revealed you have either lied or even just slightly bent the truth in your speeches.

Once lost or damaged, credibility is nearly impossible to recover or repair, both during a speech and in life. Build it and treasure it. History is full of examples of people’s credibility eroding seemingly overnight. One recent example is George Santos, a young man who was elected to Congress based on narratives later determined to be mostly false . Many people who voted for Santos felt duped by his fabrications and some within his own party called for his resignation.

Choose Language Carefully

It might be obvious you’re going to use words to communicate messages. Less obvious, is the significance these words hold for your diverse audience who are the focus of your speech. Oftentimes, the speaker thinks of themselves in speechmaking, however, you should be focused on the audience at all times.

Speaking ethically involves striving to use inclusive language, aimed at making all listeners feel represented in the language of the speech. At a minimum, inclusive language avoids the use of words that may exclude or disrespect particular groups of people. For example, avoiding gender-specific terms like “man” or “mankind.” Inclusive language also avoids statements that express or imply ideas that are sexist, racist, otherwise biased, prejudiced, or denigrating to any particular group of people. Even if the speaker means well, certain terms, especially around attributes of identity, can be interpreted as offensive, hurtful, outdated, or inappropriate.

A simple strategy to make people feel included in your speech is to use the plural pronouns “we” and “us” instead of the singular pronouns “I” and “me.” When you linguistically separate your audience from yourself, you create a divide, but when you use words to show your connection, you come together. Imagine the difference in audience reception to “Today I will tell you…” versus “Today we will cover….” This situation can be exacerbated when audience members have some knowledge on the topic. If you treat your audience as complete novices, any members experienced in your topic may feel offended.

Avoid Plagiarism

When we speak ethically, we use our own original speech content. That doesn’t mean you have to come up with the facts and evidence on your own. Just as with any other research project, you must give appropriate credit for the sources used. A good rule of thumb is, “If you didn’t write it, cite it!” Be sure to read closely the Citing Your Sources Correctly section in Ch. 7, Gathering Materials & Supporting Your Ideas. When you cite your sources, you avoid plagiarism , which is passing off other people’s work as your own. Plagiarism can have serious consequences, like failing an assignment, failing a course, or even being kicked out of the educational institution. This occurs in two ways: intentional plagiarism and unintentional plagiarism.

Figure 2.2: Bush Aide Resigns Over Plagiarism 2

Intentional plagiarism is when a speaker purposefully uses content that is not their own. The most egregious example is when someone steals an entire speech or paper and just slaps on their name. Some other instances of intentional plagiarism include: when someone fabricates sources or quotes; strategically changes a few words from a source without citing it (proper paraphrasing requires more than just changing a few words from the original source); or purposefully adds sources to their references that they didn’t use.

Something that happens more commonly is unintentional plagiarism , which occurs inadvertently. Think about what we mentioned at the beginning of the chapter, with how we are constantly taking in messages. Watching a documentary on Netflix does not make you an expert. Although it may be a great place to start building your knowledge, it doesn’t mean it is your intellectual property. That information still came from a source (the documentary), and you’ll need to cite it. Unintentional plagiarism can also occur if we use the same paper for two different classes, quote a source incorrectly, or fail to properly introduce an idea we’ve learned from someone else.

It doesn’t matter whether you meant to be intentional or unintentional, plagiarism is still unethical and can have serious consequences. There are many examples, such as a U.S. professor stepping down from a lucrative vice-chancellor position for plagiarizing passages of a grant application. A political appointee in Germany was compelled to resign from her prestigious post as minister of education and research 40 years after publishing a doctoral dissertation containing many passages with insufficient citation.

To avoid plagiarism, spend time conducting quality research and keep careful notes. Use quote marks to indicate material that is copied verbatim in your own notes so that you avoid passing the material along as paraphrased when it is not. Don’t forget to orally cite your sources in the delivery of your speech at the moment you utilize them. Also, every source cited in your References should be cited in the text of your outline at the places where you use the information. Oral citations during the speech and in-text citations in the outline are both important to avoiding any charges of academic misbehavior.

Be Prepared to Speak

Speech preparation entails picking and researching a topic, analyzing your audience, organizing your main points, creating visual aids, and practicing your delivery. You prepare so that your speech can have the greatest impact. As a speaker, it is your responsibility to consider the impact of your speech and to ensure you are communicating truthful, accurate, and appropriate information. From an ethical standpoint, preparation is crucial to ensure you are thoroughly informed about your topic and allows you to convey a sense of credibility to your audience.

When you are unprepared, you will be embarrassed and your audience will feel that you are wasting their time. Also, plagiarism is often a consequence of procrastination. Preparing well before deadline means you won’t be tempted to recite others words or ideas without proper attribution.

Ethical Responsibilities of the Listener

As you’ve seen throughout this chapter, careful consideration is taken by the speaker to craft a thoughtful and developed speech for their audience. In return, the audience should also behave ethically. When thinking about these responsibilities, identify the expectations you have for an audience when you’re speaking. Do you want them to listen with an open mind? Pay attention to you? Demonstrate respect? Of course, you do, but let’s be honest for a second…do you always listen to messages that way? It is really easy to say we are listening ethically, but this can be harder to apply when we are distracted or unprepared for listening. If this sounds like you, there are several strategies covered in chapter 4.

Figure 2.3: Ethics Committee 3

Be Prepared to Listen

When you find yourself seated in an audience about to listen to a speaker, how do you prepare? Do you tell yourself that you will be actively listening to the speaker for a certain number of minutes? Do you remind yourself to listen with an open mind? Or, do you sit there on your phone, mindlessly scrolling social media? Only one of these examples is common practice, but the others can make a huge difference in how much you take away from a speech. By telling yourself you are committed to listening to the speaker, you won’t be inclined to give in to distractions, or let your mind wander.

Avoid Prejudging and Keep an Open Mind

Unless you are watching a recorded video of a speech, you will never see or hear the same speech twice. Take it from us public speaking teachers who have heard the same speech topic countless times. Even if you think you know what the speaker is going to say, or you think you know more about a topic than the speaker, you can always learn something new. If you spend any time thinking about anything other than listening, you are bound to miss valuable information that will make you an ill-informed listener.

Be Courteous and Pay Attention

It’s simple: treat others how you would like to be treated. Who do you want to see when you are speaking to an audience? Be that person. Pay attention to your body language when sitting in an audience. What do you consider ethical body language?

Information communication technologies (ICTs) such as cell phones and laptops have made it difficult for people to focus and easy for them to be distracted. Silence your cell phones before every class . Keep your phone put away unless you absolutely need it. Likewise, do not have a laptop open during your peers’ performances. Chances are, you’re not taking notes. Looking at screens during speeches is disrespectful. Mastering the art of being in the moment can separate you from your peers in business, politics, and even personal relationships. This lesson will apply beyond the classroom. No matter your future social environments, listening attentively to others will improve your social standing, while allowing yourself to be seduced by screens will make others think you do not value their contributions.

If a speech is not capturing your attention, ask yourself what could have been done better, perhaps jotting down a few notes (paper notes will not make you look inattentive the way a screen will, even if you’re using it for a good reason) to share constructive feedback with your peers later. Even if you do not share the notes, imagining ways to spice up someone else’s speech will make you a better writer and speaker.

Providing Feedback

Public speaking instructors often ask students to provide their classmates with feedback on their speeches. Of course, you have to be paying attention if you are going to ethically provide feedback. Saying “Great job!” or “You did great” is not ethical feedback. Providing feedback to your classmates means that you are supplying them with useful comments about things they did well and/or things they could make stronger in future speeches.

Tasha Souza, a professor at Boise State University who researches classroom practices, taught one of your authors a simple approach to feedback—”gems and opportunities.” Gems are things the speaker did well. Opportunities identify areas for potential improvement. We all love to hear praise, which is good for our self-esteem, but we can’t advance without people letting us know about weaker aspects of our performance. For this reason, the most ethical feedback always helps us feel good, but also helps us move forward. No speech is without merit—we can all find gems in any performance (even our own, as painful as they may be to watch when recorded!). And, no speech is perfect—ask your instructors, most rarely give 100% scores on speeches. So, even when your classmates perform great, you should be able to find more opportunities for them to improve. The highest performers will be eager for such feedback.

Avoid Distractions

Taking care of your body is an important part of being a good listener. Get a good night’s sleep before speech days—even others’ speech days. If you are dozing during someone’s speech, they may think you find them boring, decreasing their self-confidence, or worse, they may be distracted by your fitful motions and lose their concentration. Likewise, make sure you are not starving when class starts. if your belly is rumbling, you cannot focus, and if others hear it, it could distract them, too!

At the end of this chapter, we hope you see the importance of ethics as it pertains to public speaking. Ethics impacts the speaker and the audience, alike. Being honest, thoughtful, respectful, and prepared are the key ingredients to being an ethical public speaker. It is up to you to build your credibility and be a strong speaker. It may not be easy to be ethical, but it is right .

Reflection Questions

What speakers have you heard speak that you felt were particularly ethical in their speech and why would you say their performance was ethically sound?
Give an example of a public speaker behaving unethically. What behaviors in your example are problematic and why do you consider them unethical?
Have you ever questioned the credibility of a speaker? What did they say that made you question their credibility? Did you question their competence, ethics, or both, and why?
What do you know about plagiarism now that you didn’t know before? If you did not learn anything new, which aspects of plagiarism do you think novice speakers should be most cautious about?
Which aspects of being an ethical listener do you hope to achieve in this class?

Credibility

Inclusive language

Intentional Plagiarism

Unintentional Plagiarism

Share This Book

3 Ethics and Public Speaking

Anthony Naaeke, Ph.D. and Eva Kolbusz-Kijne, Ph.D.

Learning Objectives

After reading this chapter, you should be able to

Discuss the meaning of ethics.
Distinguish between absolute and relativist perspectives on ethics.
Identify and apply the code of ethics for ethical public speaking established by the National Communication Association.
Distinguish between ethical and unethical speech.

Introduction

“I regret it now because the information was wrong.”

— Colin Powell

The above quotation from former United States Secretary of State Colin Powell directly applies to the discussion we are about to have in this chapter, namely, ethics in public speaking. In a television interview on the Larry King Live CNN program first aired in 2010 [ transcript ], Powell expressed regret for a speech he delivered to the United Nations in which he provided what he believed were justifiable reasons for the United States to go to war against Iraq following the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks against the United States. Although Powell believed at the time of his speech that the information and evidence he provided in the speech were accurate, ostensibly because he trusted the officials who vetted the accuracy of the information, he later realized that the speech was based on misinformation and inaccurate evidence.

By expressing regret for delivering a speech filled with inaccuracies, Powell basically acknowledged that his speech was unethical. However, by publicly expressing regret for an unethical speech that he delivered, he fulfilled the ninth ethical principle of the National Communication Association’s code for ethical speaking, which states, “We accept responsibility for the short- and long-term consequences for our own communication and expect the same of others.” This principle calls for ethical speakers to take responsibility for mistakes and errors made in communication whether in the short or long term when they become aware of the errors and inaccuracies they expressed.

In this chapter we will explore the meaning of ethics, ethical perspectives, and the Code of Ethics of the National Communication Association, and we will distinguish between ethical and unethical speeches.

Ethics has to do with social norms regarding right and wrong. It is a branch of philosophy that deals with right and wrong. Because different cultures have different norms about right and wrong, ethics is a very contested zone in all aspects of human encounters. One culture may consider something to be right while another may consider the same thing to be wrong. Hence, the contested nature of ethics. However, for effective communication, especially communication that is intended to move an audience to make choices or decisions, some basic agreement on what is right and wrong is necessary.

In Institutio Oratoria (Institutes of Oratory), the Roman rhetorician Quintilian wrote that the perfect orator is first “a good man speaking well.” This simple statement establishes a fundamental expectation for ethical public speaking, namely, that great oratory should entail both the ethical character of the speaker as well as delivery that embodies confidence, competence, dynamism, and good will (addresses the needs of an audience).

For Quintilian and other rhetoricians such as Cicero and St. Augustine, rhetoric or oratory should be grounded in truth and not deception. According to these rhetoricians, the communication of truth distinguishes ethical rhetoric from sophistic rhetoric which uses any means, including deceptive ways, untruths, and outright lies, to persuade an audience.

Ethical Perspectives

There are different perspectives on ethics, but this section will concentrate on two of them, namely, the absolute values perspective and the relativist perspective.

The absolute values perspective on ethics holds that irrespective of person, place, or time, right is right and wrong is wrong. In other words, there are universal ethical values that apply to all people and cultures. For example, it is wrong to kill or to tell a lie or to steal or to defraud. This means that irrespective of person or culture or situation, a person who tells a lie or kills or defrauds others has done an unethical act.

Ethical relativism on the other hand is the philosophical position that the sense of right and wrong is always relative to the individual and not universal to all people and situations. The Encyclopedia Britannica defines ethical relativism as “the doctrine that there are no absolute truths in ethics and that what is morally right or wrong varies from person to person or from society to society.” The arguments for ethical relativism are mainly two-fold. According to Britannica, one argument, based on the thinking of Greek philosopher Herodotus (5th century BC), claims that every culture has its own customs and norms and no culture’s values, norms, and customs are better than those of another. A second argument in favor of ethical relativism, according to Britannica, is based on the thinking of the 18th-century philosopher David Hume, who expressed the idea that moral values are grounded in emotion and not reason and cannot, therefore, be universalized.

Implications of Ethical Perspectives for Public Speaking

When applied to public speaking, the absolute values perspective on ethics implies that there are or should be rigorous principles that guide how to teach public speaking, how to write a speech, how to deliver a speech, how to reference sources, what is considered appropriate vocal projection, eye contact, posture, vocabulary, etc. This approach to public speaking can be regarded by minority groups based on race, culture, or nationality, as oppressive in the context of culturally sustaining pedagogies and the ongoing efforts to engage pedagogies that are inclusive, diverse, and equity minded.

On the other hand, a fundamental implication of ethical relativism for public speaking is that there are no universal norms or ethical codes that govern what and how to make public presentations. This means that depending on the speaker, context, audience, or purpose, a public speaker decides what and how to present without following a predetermined style. This also means that the principle of ethical relativism is more respectful of diverse cultural values, culturally relevant speech patterns, thought processes, and language use. In the context of culturally sustaining pedagogies, the relativist ethical perspective would allow more flexibility in how public speaking is taught and how students, depending on their various backgrounds, prepare and deliver speeches.

Credo for Ethical Communication

Despite the implications of the two ethical perspectives on ethics discussed above, the National Communication Association (NCA) has established a Credo for Ethical Communication to guide the practice of the discipline.

The NCA believes ethical communication is “fundamental to responsible thinking, decision making, and the development of relationships and communities within and across contexts, cultures, channels, and media.” Conversely, the NCA believes that unethical communication threatens the well-being of individuals and society. Consequently, the NCA has established a Credo for Ethical Communication .

The NCA’s Credo for Ethical Communication is extensive, but for the purpose of this chapter addressing ethics in public speaking, it is important to outline and focus on the following principles.

Nine Principles of the Credo for Ethical Communication

We advocate truthfulness, accuracy, honesty, and reason as essential to the integrity of communication.
We endorse freedom of expression, diversity of perspective, and tolerance of dissent to achieve the informed and responsible decision making fundamental to a civil society.
We strive to understand and respect other communicators before evaluating and responding to their messages.
We promote access to communication resources and opportunities as necessary to fulfill human potential and contribute to the well-being of individuals, families, communities, and society.
We promote communication climates of caring and mutual understanding that respect the unique needs and characteristics of individual communicators.
We condemn communication that degrades individuals and humanity through distortion, intimidation, coercion, and violence, and through the expression of intolerance and hatred.
We are committed to the courageous expression of personal convictions in pursuit of fairness and justice.
We advocate sharing information, opinions, and feelings when facing significant choices while also respecting privacy and confidentiality.
We accept responsibility for the short- and long-term consequences for our own communication and expect the same of others.

In essence, the principles outlined in the code emphasize the importance of communication that is grounded in truth, honesty, accuracy, and respect for the audience as an ethical responsibility of a speaker.

Distinguishing Between Ethical and Unethical Speeches

Based on the exploration of ethics, perspectives on ethics, and the NCA Credo for Ethical Communication, it is appropriate to observe that irrespective of cultural background or values, some general principles should guide what is ethical or unethical in public speaking.

Purpose of the Speech

Effective communication must be purpose-driven. The purpose of a speech is important because it lets the speaker and audience know the ultimate outcome of the speech. The purpose of the speech should seek to accomplish something good. If the purpose of a speech is unethical it means that it seeks to accomplish something bad. Let us explore some examples to illustrate. In the speech by former Secretary of State Colin Powell to the United Nations that we referenced in the introduction of this chapter, his purpose was to persuade the international community that Saddam Hussien, then President of Iraq, had weapons of mass destruction that posed serious security problems to the world and that the United States would have to go to war against Iraq in order to prevent the use of these weapons against the international community. The purpose of the speech was ethical in as far as it sought to protect the common good of the international community by preventing a nation and its leader from doing harm to people. On the other hand, a speech whose purpose is to arouse anger and resentment against specific groups of people, such as immigrants, would be unethical because such a speech aims to do harm to a group of people by appealing to the emotion of anger in its audience, who might then act violently or discriminate against immigrants, as evidenced by a speech by former President Donald Trump in which he called Mexicans murderers and rapists.

Credibility of Evidence

Another element of an ethical speech is that the information given should be accurate and reliable. Accurate information is based on facts and not opinion; facts can be demonstrated or proven, while opinions are the personal views of a person that may or may not be factual. The evidence should also be accurate in the sense that it should fully and properly represent the ideas or statements of others within the context in which such ideas or statements are made. Evidence that is not accurate distorts the original message of the source of information and misleads an audience. The credibility of evidence is not only about what is stated but also about who says it. To be ethical, a public speaker must verify that the source of information they use as evidence to support claims is reliable or can be trusted. For example, the statements of a racist bigot in defense of racism cannot be considered reliable because of the personal disposition of the source.

Another important consideration about the credibility of evidence is crediting the sources of the information used. An ethical speaker must let the audience know the source of the information, including data, statistics, and images such as paintings, pictures, and drawings, if the information was taken from another person’s work. Failing to credit the sources of information constitutes plagiarism.

Plagiarism is using another person’s ideas or work without crediting the source. There are three types of plagiarism: global, patchwork and incremental.

Global plagiarism is taking the entire work of another person and not crediting the source. For example, if you take a speech that was written by someone else and deliver it to an audience without letting the audience know who the original writer of the speech is, that would constitute global plagiarism.
Patchwork plagiarism on the other hand takes substantive parts, such as a paragraph, from different sources and puts them together without crediting the sources. Patchwork plagiarism is easy to commit when you highlight, copy, and paste information from different sources without crediting the sources.
The third type of plagiarism, incremental plagiarism, happens when you take a phrase or sentence from various sources and fail to credit the sources. Ethical speakers always credit their sources.

Arrangement of Ideas

One other way to be an ethical speaker is to arrange your ideas in a way that makes it easy for the audience to follow the logical flow of the message. An ethical speaker should facilitate the understanding of the message and not confuse the audience with disorderly placement of ideas. In an orderly arrangement of ideas, the audience can easily follow how one idea moves to another or relates to another, whereas in a confusing arrangement of ideas, the audience struggles to see how one point relates to another or flows into another.

An ethical speaker should always be mindful that the language used is familiar to the audience and not too technical or abstract. Using familiar language makes it easy for the audience to understand a message being communicated, while technical or abstract language may be appropriate only for specific audiences, especially based on profession and level of education. An ethical speaker also uses inclusive language. Racist, sexist, and abusive language looks down on a group of people while extolling the perceived superiority of the speaker over the audience.

Respect for the Audience

In addition to the above guidelines for ethical speaking, a speaker should show respect to an audience by being on time to the event and respect the time allotted for the speech. The speaker also shows respect to an audience by dressing appropriately and listening to the feedback from the audience and responding to questions from the audience honestly.

Finally, an ethical speaker should know what they are talking about, be well prepared, dress appropriately, speak clearly, engage the audience through direct eye contact and body movements that show physical/mindful presence and attention to the audience.

Other Guiding Principles for Ethical Public Speaking

Many scholars of ethical communication agree that an ethical speaker should have integrity, competence, responsibility, respect, and concern (Plante, 2004). Integrity means being an honest, fair and a just person. Competence is a quality of someone who is knowledgeable and skilled in some job or task. Responsibility has to do with keeping promises and being attentive to one’s obligations. An ethical speaker should be respectful of others in terms of paying attention to their rights, needs, dignity and be concerned about the needs of others.

In this chapter, we explored the meaning of ethics and different perspectives on ethics, and we distinguished between ethical and unethical speeches. We also outlined the Credo for Ethical Communication by the National Communication Association and provided practical guidelines for ethical public speaking. In the context of higher education that emphasizes the need for culturally sustaining pedagogies, an ethical speaker must be respectful of diverse audiences they address. Ethical speakers should use evidence that is based on reliable facts while considering the lived experiences and needs of the audience.

Review Questions

What is your understanding of ethics and why is it important for public speakers?
Identify nine principles of ethical communication outlined by the National Communication Association.

Class Exercises

Show a speech to the class and put students in small groups to discuss and explain why the speech is ethical or unethical.
Put students in small groups and ask them to make a list of things they consider ethical or unethical in a speech.

Works Cited

Encyclopedia Britannica. Ethical Relativism. https://www.britannica.com/topic/ethical-relativism . Accessed 6/5/21.

Plante, Thomas. Do the Right Thing: Living Ethically in an Unethical World . Oakland, CA. New Harbinger Publications, 2004, p. 49-145.

Powell, Colin. Interview on Larry King Live. CNN . 2011. YouTube Video. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d93_u1HHgM4 . Accessed 6/5/21.

The Gifford Lectures. Relative and Absolute Value. https://www.giffordlectures.org/books/moral-values-and-idea-god/6-relative-and-absolute-value . Accessed 6/5/21.

Trump, Donald. Interview on MSNBC. YouTube Video. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jaz1J0s-cL4 . Accessed 6/5/21.

a system or set of moral principles; the study of moral principles

the use of another person’s creation or ideas without crediting that person

Start Here, Speak Anywhere! Second Edition Copyright © by Anthony Naaeke, Ph.D. and Eva Kolbusz-Kijne, Ph.D. is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

Chapter 2: Ethics Matters: Understanding the Ethics of Public Speaking

Ethics today.

The devil and an angel playing chess with human pawns

Pixabay – CC0 public domain.

Every day, people around the world make ethical decisions regarding public speech. Is it ever appropriate to lie to a group of people if it’s in the group’s best interest? As a speaker, should you use evidence within a speech that you are not sure is correct if it supports the speech’s core argument? As a listener, should you refuse to listen to a speaker with whom you fundamentally disagree? These three examples represent ethical choices speakers and listeners face in the public speaking context. In this chapter, we will explore what it means to be both an ethical speaker and an ethical listener. To help you understand the issues involved with thinking about ethics, this chapter begins by presenting a model for ethical communication known as the ethics pyramid. We will then show how the National Communication Association (NCA) Credo for Ethical Communication can be applied to public speaking. The chapter will conclude with a general discussion of free speech.

Share This Book

school Campus Bookshelves
menu_book Bookshelves
perm_media Learning Objects
login Login
how_to_reg Request Instructor Account
hub Instructor Commons
Download Page (PDF)
Download Full Book (PDF)
Periodic Table
Physics Constants
Scientific Calculator
Reference & Cite
Tools expand_more
Readability

selected template will load here

This action is not available.

3: Ethics in Public Speaking

Last updated
Save as PDF
Page ID 8972

Alyssa Millner@King College & Rachel Price@University of Kentucky
Millersville University via Public Speaking Project

Communication experts agree that ethical communication is an important responsibility of the speaker. This chapter explores ethics and ethical communication in public speaking. First, ethics and ethical standards are defined. Second, this chapter describes principles of ethical public speaking, with guidelines for avoiding plagiarism, citing sources, and setting responsible speech goals. Lastly, your responsibilities as an ethical listener of public speaking are explored.

3.1: Introduction
3.2: Defining Ethics
3.3: Ethical Speaking
3.4: Ethical Listening
3.5: Conclusion
3.6: Activities and Glossary

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

Chapter 3: Ethics in Public Speaking

3.1 – ethical stances on public speaking.

A public speaker, whether delivering a speech in a classroom, board room, civic meeting, or in any other venue, must uphold certain ethical standards. These standards will allow the audience to make informed choices, to view the speaker as a credible source of information, and to avoid repercussions of bad ethical choices.

Ethics refers to the branch of philosophy that involves determinations of what is right and moral. On a personal level, ethics are your own standard of what you should and should not do in the various situations or in all situations. Although ethics are based on personal decisions and values, they are also influenced by factors outside of you. We will look at various ways ethics, particularly ethics related to speech, have been thought about. Determine how you would explain your own ethical standard for communication. Along with being able to articulate what you would not do, you should have an appreciation for why behaving ethically is important to you.

One of “right things” and most important ways that we speak ethically is to use material from others correctly. Occasionally, in the news media, we hear about a political speaker who uses the words of other speakers without attribution or of scholars who use pages out of another scholar’s work without consent or citation. Usually the discussion of plagiarism stays within the community where it occurred, but there is still damage done to the “borrower’s” reputation as an ethical person and scholar.

Why does it matter if a speaker or writer commits plagiarism? Why and how do we judge a speaker as ethical? Why, for example, do we value originality and correct citation of sources in public life, as well as in the academic world, especially in the North American context? These are not new questions and some of the answers lie in age-old philosophies of communication.

Legal Issues in Public Speaking

The Canadian Constitution guarantees freedom of expression, much like the more famous First Amendment in the United States. Thomas Emerson (1970), a Constitutional scholar and Yale Law Professor, asserted that freedom of expression is more than just a right; it is a necessity for having a free and democratic society.

There are a few limits on freedom of expression in a criminal sense. Threatening a person’s life or impersonating a police officer is not legal, for example. People wishing to hold a large protest in a public place may need a permit, not because of limits on speech, but to protect the safety of so many participants and people who would otherwise use the space.

At the same time, people are responsible for what they say and write. If a person falsely claims that somebody else has done something unsavoury, they may find themselves the subject of a lawsuit for slander or libel. The latter issue falls into the category of defamatory speech , which is a false statement that damages a person’s character, fame or reputation.

With the Internet and social media, these issues become more complicated, of course. In the past, someone could express themselves only in limited ways: standing on a street corner, attending a public meeting, putting the words on paper and distributing them, or maybe getting on radio or television (if allowed or if wealthy enough).

Today, almost anyone with a laptop, a webcam, an ISP, and technical know-how can be effective in getting a message to the masses. While most people use technology and the Internet for fun, profit, or self-expression, some use it for hurt—bullying, defamation, even spreading terrorism.

The judicial system is trying to keep up with the challenges that the digital age brings to protecting free expression, while sheltering us from the negative consequences of some forms of free expression.

3.2 – Credibility and Ethics

When Aristotle used the term ethos in the 5th century B.C.E. to describe one of the means of persuasion, he defined it as the “wisdom, sagacity, and character of the rhetor.” Modern scholars of communication and persuasion speak more about “credibility” as an attitude the audience has toward the speaker, based on both reality and perception, rather than an innate trait of the speaker. Audience members trust the speaker to varying degrees, based on the evidence and knowledge they have about the speaker and how that lines up with certain factors:

Similarity: does the speaker have experiences, values, and beliefs in common with the audience? Can the audience relate to the speaker because of these commonalities?
Character: does the speaker, in word and action, in the speech and in everyday life, show honesty and integrity?
Competence: does the speaker show that they have expertise and sound knowledge about the topic, especially through firsthand experience?
Good will: does the audience perceive the speaker to have ethical intentions toward the audience?

Understandably, the same speaker will have a different level of credibility with different audiences. However, these groups express their values in different ways. When trying to develop your own credibility as a speaker with an audience, you have to keep in mind all four of the factors listed above. Any attempt to portray yourself as “similar” to the audience through deception or without authenticity will undermine your credibility in the long run. To only pretend to have good will and want the best for the audience will also have a short-term effect. And to intentionally misrepresent your background, such as experience and credentials, is clearly unethical.

3.3 – Plagiarism

Turning in someone else’s work as your own;
Copying words or ideas from someone else without giving credit;
Failing to put quotation marks around an exact quotation correctly;
Giving incorrect information about the source of a quotation;
Changing words but copying the sentence structure of a source without giving credit;
Copying so many words or ideas from a source that it makes up the majority of your work, whether you give credit or not.

In the business or professional world, plagiarism is never tolerated because using original work without permission (which usually includes paying fees to the author or artist) can end in serious legal action. The Internet has made plagiarism easier and thus increased the student’s responsibility to know how to cite and use source material correctly. (But bless the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License that made this Open Educational Resource textbook possible, legal, and free for students!)

Ethically Crediting Sources

In using source material correctly, a speaker takes three steps:

The speaker clearly cites the source of the information. It is here that the oral mode of communication differs from the written mode. In a paper, such as for literature, you would only need to include a parenthetical citation, such as “(Jones, 2012, p. 78).” A speech is quite different. Saying “According to Jones, 2012, p. 78,” really does very little for the audience. They can’t turn to the back of the paper. They don’t have a way, other than oral communication, to understand the type of information being cited, how recent it is, the credibility of the author you are citing and why you think they are a valid source, or the title of the work. In a speech, giving more complete information would help the audience understand its value. The page number, the publishing company, and city it was published in are probably not important, but what is important is whether it is a website, a scholarly article, or a book; whether it was written in 1950 or 2010; and what is the position, background, or credentials of the source. So, instead of “According to Jones, p. 78,” a better approach would be, “According to Dr. Samuel Jones, Head of Cardiology at Vanderbilt University, in a 2010 article in a prestigious medical journal…”Or“In her 2012 book, The Iraq War in Context , historian Mary Smith of the University of Georgia states that…” Or“In consulting the website for the American Humane Society, I found these statistics about animal abuse compiled by the Society in 2021…”This approach shows more clearly that you have done proper research to support your ideas and arguments. It also allows your audience to find the material if they want more information. Notice that in all three examples the citation precedes the fact or information being cited. This order allows the audience to recognize the borrowed material better. The use of a clear citation up-front makes it more noticeable, as well as more credible, to the audience.
The speaker should take special care to use information that is in context and relevant. This step takes more critical thinking skills. For example, it is often easy to misinterpret statistical information or take a quotation from an expert in one field and apply it to another field. It is also important to label facts as facts and opinions as opinions, especially when dealing with controversial subjects. In addition, be sure you understand the material you are citing before using it. If you are unsure of any words, look their definitions up so you are sure to be using the material as it is intended. Finally, understand the type of publication or source you are using; for example, note the difference between scholarly publications and journalistic stories or somebody’s personal blog.
The speaker should phrase or summarize the ideas of the source into their own words. Paraphrasing, which is putting the words and ideas of others into one’s own authentic or personal language, is often misunderstood by students. Paraphrasing is not changing 10% of the words in a long quotation, but still keeping most of the vocabulary and word order (called syntax) of the source. You should compose the information in your own “voice” or way of expressing yourself.In fact, you would be better off to think in terms of summarizing your source material rather than paraphrasing. For one, you will be less likely to use too much of the original and, therefore, be skirting the edge of plagiarism. Secondly, you will usually want to put the main arguments of a source in your own words and make it shorter.

As mentioned before, students often have not been trained to use source material correctly and plagiarize unintentionally. But, as the old saying goes: “Ignorance of the law is no excuse.” You will still be held accountable whether you understand or not, so now, early in your college career, is the time you should learn to cite source material correctly in oral and written communication.

Attribution

This chapter was adapted from Exploring Public Speaking , 4th Edition by Barbara Tucker and Matthew LeHew, which is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Public Speaking for Today's Audiences Copyright © 2023 by Sam Schechter is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

Chapter 2 Ethics Matters: Understanding the Ethics of Public Speaking

Ethics today.

2.1 The Ethics Pyramid

Learning objective.

Explain how the three levels of the ethics pyramid might be used in evaluating the ethical choices of a public speaker or listener.

The word “ethics” can mean different things to different people. Whether it is an ethical lapse in business or politics or a disagreement about medical treatments and end-of-life choices, people come into contact with ethical dilemmas regularly. Speakers and listeners of public speech face numerous ethical dilemmas as well. What kinds of support material and sources are ethical to use? How much should a speaker adapt to an audience without sacrificing his or her own views? What makes a speech ethical?

Figure 2.1 Ethical Pyramid

Elspeth Tilley, a public communication ethics expert from Massey University, proposes a structured approach to thinking about ethics. Tilley, E. (2005). The ethics pyramid: Making ethics unavoidable in the public relations process. Journal of Mass Media Ethics , 20 , 305–320. Her ethics pyramid involves three basic concepts: intent, means, and ends. Figure 2.1 "Ethical Pyramid" illustrates the Tilley pyramid.

According to Tilley, the first major consideration to be aware of when examining the ethicality of something is the issue of intent The degree to which an individual is cognitively aware of her or his behavior, the means one uses, and the ends one achieves. . To be an ethical speaker or listener, it is important to begin with ethical intentions. For example, if we agree that honesty is ethical, it follows that ethical speakers will prepare their remarks with the intention of telling the truth to their audiences. Similarly, if we agree that it is ethical to listen with an open mind, it follows that ethical listeners will be intentional about letting a speaker make his or her case before forming judgments.

One option for assessing intent is to talk with others about how ethical they think a behavior is; if you get a variety of answers, it might be a sign that the behavior is not ethical and should be avoided. A second option is to check out existing codes of ethics. Many professional organizations, including the Independent Computer Consultants Association, American Counseling Association, and American Society of Home Inspectors, have codes of conduct or ethical guidelines for their members. Individual corporations such as Monsanto, Coca-Cola, Intel, and ConocoPhillips also have ethical guidelines for how their employees should interact with suppliers or clients. Even when specific ethical codes are not present, you can apply general ethical principles, such as whether a behavior is beneficial for the majority or whether you would approve of the same behavior if you were listening to a speech instead of giving it.

In addition, it is important to be aware that people can engage in unethical behavior unintentionally. For example, suppose we agree that it is unethical to take someone else’s words and pass them off as your own—a behavior known as plagiarism. What happens if a speaker makes a statement that he believes he thought of on his own, but the statement is actually quoted from a radio commentator whom he heard without clearly remembering doing so? The plagiarism was unintentional, but does that make it ethical?

Tilley describes the means The tools or behaviors that one employs to achieve a desired outcome. you use to communicate with others as the second level of the ethics pyramid. According to McCroskey, Wrench, and Richmond, McCroskey, J. C., Wrench, J. S., & Richmond, V. P. (2003). Principles of public speaking . Indianapolis, IN: The College Network. “means” are the tools or behaviors we employ to achieve a desired outcome. We must realize that there are a range of possible behavioral choices for any situation and that some choices are good, some are bad, and some fall in between.

For example, suppose you want your friend Marty to spend an hour reviewing a draft of your speech according to criteria, such as audience appropriateness, adequate research, strong support of assertions, and dynamic introduction and conclusion. What means might you use to persuade Marty to do you this favor? You might explain that you value Marty’s opinion and will gladly return the favor the next time Marty is preparing a speech (good means), or you might threaten to tell a professor that Marty cheated on a test (bad means). While both of these means may lead to the same end—having Marty agree to review your speech—one is clearly more ethical than the other.

The final part of the ethics pyramid is the ends. According to McCroskey, Wrench, and Richmond, McCroskey, J. C., Wrench, J. S., & Richmond, V. P. (2003). Principles of public speaking . Indianapolis, IN: The College Network. ends The outcomes that one desires to achieve. are those outcomes that you desire to achieve. Examples of ends might include persuading your audience to make a financial contribution for your participation in Relay for Life, persuading a group of homeowners that your real estate agency would best meet their needs, or informing your fellow students about newly required university fees. Whereas the means are the behavioral choices we make, the ends are the results of those choices.

Like intentions and means, ends can be good or bad, or they can fall into a gray area where it is unclear just how ethical or unethical they are. For example, suppose a city council wants to balance the city’s annual budget. Balancing the budget may be a good end, assuming that the city has adequate tax revenues and areas of discretionary spending for nonessential services for the year in question. However, voters might argue that balancing the budget is a bad end if the city lacks these things for the year in question, because in that case balancing the budget would require raising taxes, curtailing essential city services, or both.

When examining ends, we need to think about both the source and the receiver of the message or behavior. Some end results could be good for the source but bad for the receiver, or vice versa. Suppose, for example, that Anita belongs to a club that is raffling off a course of dancing lessons. Anita sells Ben a ten-dollar raffle ticket. However, Ben later thinks it over and realizes that he has no desire to take dancing lessons and that if he should win the raffle, he will never take the lessons. Anita’s club has gained ten dollars—a good end—but Ben has lost ten dollars—a bad end. Again, the ethical standards you and your audience expect to be met will help in deciding whether a particular combination of speaker and audience ends is ethical.

Thinking through the Pyramid

Ultimately, understanding ethics is a matter of balancing all three parts of the ethical pyramid: intent, means, and ends. When thinking about the ethics of a given behavior, Tilley recommends asking yourself three basic questions:

“Have I discussed the ethicality of the behavior with others and come to a general consensus that the behavior is ethical?”
“Does the behavior adhere to known codes of ethics?”
“Would I be happy if the outcomes of the behavior were reversed and applied to me?” Tilley, E. (2005). The ethics pyramid: Making ethics unavoidable in the public relations process. Journal of Mass Media Ethics , 20 , 305–320.

While you do not need to ask yourself these three questions before enacting every behavior as you go through a day, they do provide a useful framework for thinking through a behavior when you are not sure whether a given action, or statement, may be unethical. Ultimately, understanding ethics is a matter of balancing all three parts of the ethical pyramid: intent, means, and ends.

Key Takeaway

The ethics pyramid is a pictorial way of understanding the three fundamental parts of ethics: intent, means, and ends. Intent exists at the base of the ethical pyramid and serves as a foundation for determining the ethics of specific behavior. Means are the tools one uses to accomplish a goal and constitute the second layer of the ethical pyramid. Finally, ends are the results that occur after a specific behavior has occurred and exist at the top of the pyramid.
Can you think of a time when you intended to have a “good” end and employed “good” means, but you ended up accomplishing a “bad” end? Why do you think our ends are not always in line with our intentions?
Ursula is developing a speech on the importance of organ donation. She has found lots of impressive statistics in her research but feels she needs an interesting story to really make an impression on her audience and persuade them to become organ donors. Ursula can’t find a true story she really likes, so she takes elements of several stories and pieces them together into a single story. Her speech is a huge success and six of her classmates sign up to be organ donors immediately after her presentation. How do we decide whether Ursula’s behavior is ethical?
Pablo has been scheduled to work late several nights this week and is very tired by the time his public speaking class rolls around in the late afternoon. One of his classmates gives a speech about environmental sustainability and Pablo does not really pay attention to what the classmate is saying. After the speech, Pablo’s teacher asks him to critique the speech. Because he doesn’t really know what happened in the speech, Pablo makes a general statement that the speech was pretty good, that the delivery was OK, and that the organization was fine. Using the ethics pyramid as a guide, in what ways might Pablo’s response be ethical? In what ways might it be unethical? What are Pablo’s responsibilities as an ethical listener?

2.2 Ethics in Public Speaking

Learning objectives.

Understand how to apply the National Communication Association (NCA) Credo for Ethical Communication within the context of public speaking.
Understand how you can apply ethics to your public speaking preparation process.

Communication Code of Ethics

In 1999, the National Communication Association officially adopted the Credo for Ethical Communication (see the following sidebar). Ultimately, the NCA Credo for Ethical Communication is a set of beliefs communication scholars have about the ethics of human communication.

National Communication Association Credo for Ethical Communication

Questions of right and wrong arise whenever people communicate. Ethical communication is fundamental to responsible thinking, decision making, and the development of relationships and communities within and across contexts, cultures, channels, and media. Moreover, ethical communication enhances human worth and dignity by fostering truthfulness, fairness, responsibility, personal integrity, and respect for self and others. We believe that unethical communication threatens the quality of all communication and consequently the well-being of individuals and the society in which we live. Therefore we, the members of the National Communication Association, endorse and are committed to practicing the following principles of ethical communication:

We advocate truthfulness, accuracy, honesty, and reason as essential to the integrity of communication.
We endorse freedom of expression, diversity of perspective, and tolerance of dissent to achieve the informed and responsible decision making fundamental to a civil society.
We strive to understand and respect other communicators before evaluating and responding to their messages.
We promote access to communication resources and opportunities as necessary to fulfill human potential and contribute to the well-being of families, communities, and society.
We promote communication climates of caring and mutual understanding that respect the unique needs and characteristics of individual communicators.
We condemn communication that degrades individuals and humanity through distortion, intimidation, coercion, and violence, and through the expression of intolerance and hatred.
We are committed to the courageous expression of personal convictions in pursuit of fairness and justice.
We advocate sharing information, opinions, and feelings when facing significant choices while also respecting privacy and confidentiality.
We accept responsibility for the short- and long-term consequences of our own communication and expect the same of others.

Source: http://www.natcom.org/Default.aspx?id=134&terms=Credo

Applying the NCA Credo to Public Speaking

We Advocate Truthfulness, Accuracy, Honesty, and Reason as Essential to the Integrity of Communication

The second part of information honesty is to fully disclose where we obtain the information in our speeches. As ethical speakers, it is important to always cite your sources of information within the body of a speech. Whether you conducted an interview or read a newspaper article, you must tell your listeners where the information came from. We mentioned earlier in this chapter that using someone else’s words or ideas without giving credit is called plagiarism Using someone else’s words or ideas without giving credit. . The word “plagiarism” stems from the Latin word plagiaries , or kidnapper. The American Psychological Association states in its publication manual that ethical speakers do not claim “words and ideas of another as their own; they give credit where credit is due.” American Psychological Association. (2001). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association (5th ed.). Washington, DC: Author, p. 349.

In the previous sentence, we placed quotation marks around the sentence to indicate that the words came from the American Psychological Association and not from us. When speaking informally, people sometimes use “air quotes” to signal direct quotations—but this is not a recommended technique in public speaking. Instead, speakers need to verbally tell an audience when they are using someone else’s information. The consequences for failing to cite sources during public speeches can be substantial. When Senator Joseph Biden was running for president of the United States in 1988, reporters found that he had plagiarized portions of his stump speech from British politician Neil Kinnock. Biden was forced to drop out of the race as a result. More recently, the student newspaper at Malone University in Ohio alleged that the university president, Gary W. Streit, had plagiarized material in a public speech. Streit retired abruptly as a result.

Even if you are not running for president of the United States or serving as a college president, citing sources is important to you as a student. Many universities have policies that include dismissal from the institution for student plagiarism of academic work, including public speeches. Failing to cite your sources might result, at best, in lower credibility with your audience and, at worst, in a failing grade on your assignment or expulsion from your school. While we will talk in more detail about plagiarism later in this book, we cannot emphasize enough the importance of giving credit to the speakers and authors whose ideas we pass on within our own speeches and writing.

The second plagiarism trap public speakers fall into is paraphrasing what someone else said or wrote without giving credit to the speaker or author. For example, you may have read a book and learned that there are three types of schoolyard bullying. In the middle of your speech you talk about those three types of schoolyard bullying. If you do not tell your audience where you found that information, you are plagiarizing. Typically, the only information you do not need to cite is information that is general knowledge. General knowledge is information that is publicly available and widely known by a large segment of society. For example, you would not need to provide a citation within a speech for the name of Delaware’s capital. Although many people do not know the capital of Delaware without looking it up, this information is publicly available and easily accessible, so assigning credit to one specific source is not useful or necessary.

In this example, we see that the authors of this paragraph (Wrench, DiMartino, Ramirez, Oviedio, & Tesfamariam) cited information from two external sources: Shore and Barclay and Tummer, Edgley, and Olmstead. These two groups of authors are given credit for their ideas. The authors make it clear that they (Wrench, DiMartino, Ramirez, Oviedio, and Tesfamariam) did not produce the television show House or conduct the study that found that only 38.5 percent of statements were completely honest. Instead, these authors cited information found in two other locations. This type of citation is appropriate.

There are two main reasons we do this. First, Wrench, DiMartino, Ramirez, Oviedio, and Tesfamariam may have mistyped the information. Suppose the study by Turner, Edgley, and Olstead really actually found that 58.5 percent of the responses were completely honest. If you cited the revised number (38.5 percent) from the paragraph, you would be further spreading incorrect information.

We Endorse Freedom of Expression, Diversity of Perspective, and Tolerance of Dissent to Achieve the Informed and Responsible Decision Making Fundamental to a Civil Society

Listening to diverse perspectives includes being willing to hear dissenting voices. Dissent is by nature uncomfortable, as it entails expressing opposition to authority, often in very unflattering terms. Legal scholar Steven H. Shiffrin has argued in favor of some symbolic speech (e.g., flag burning) because we as a society value the ability of anyone to express their dissent against the will and ideas of the majority. Shiffrin, S. H. (1999). Dissent, injustice and the meanings of America . Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Ethical communicators will be receptive to dissent, no matter how strongly they may disagree with the speaker’s message because they realize that a society that forbids dissent cannot function democratically.

Ultimately, honoring free speech and seeking out a variety of perspectives is very important for all listeners. We will discuss this idea further in the chapter on listening.

We Strive to Understand and Respect Other Communicators before Evaluating and Responding to Their Messages

This is another ethical characteristic that is specifically directed at receivers of a message. As listeners, we often let our perceptions of a speaker’s nonverbal behavior—his or her appearance, posture, mannerisms, eye contact, and so on—determine our opinions about a message before the speaker has said a word. We may also find ourselves judging a speaker based on information we have heard about him or her from other people. Perhaps you have heard from other students that a particular teacher is a really boring lecturer or is really entertaining in class. Even though you do not have personal knowledge, you may prejudge the teacher and his or her message based on information you have been given from others. The NCA credo A formal statement of core beliefs and principles. reminds us that to be ethical listeners, we need to avoid such judgments and instead make an effort to listen respectfully; only when we have understood a speaker’s viewpoint are we ready to begin forming our opinions of the message.

We Promote Access to Communication Resources and Opportunities as Necessary to Fulfill Human Potential and Contribute to the Well-Being of Families, Communities, and Society

We Promote Communication Climates of Caring and Mutual Understanding That Respect the Unique Needs and Characteristics of Individual Communicators

Second, it is important for a speaker to create an atmosphere of mutual understanding. To do this, you should first learn as much as possible about your audience, a process called audience analysis. We will discuss this topic in more detail in the audience analysis chapter.

We Condemn Communication That Degrades Individuals and Humanity through Distortion, Intimidation, Coercion, and Violence and through the Expression of Intolerance and Hatred

Distortion Purposefully twisting information in a way that detracts from its original meaning. occurs when someone purposefully twists information in a way that detracts from its original meaning. Unfortunately, some speakers take information and use it in a manner that is not in the spirit of the original information. One place we see distortion frequently is in the political context, where politicians cite a statistic or the results of a study and either completely alter the information or use it in a deceptive manner. FactCheck.org, a project of the Annenberg Public Policy Center ( http://www.factcheck.org ), and the St. Petersburg Times’s Politifact ( http://www.politifact.com ) are nonpartisan organizations devoted to analyzing political messages and demonstrating how information has been distorted.

Expressions of intolerance and hatred that are to be avoided include using ageist Language that demeans an individual because of her or his age. , heterosexist Language that assumes that all members within an audience are heterosexual or is intended to demean nonheterosexual audience members. , racist Language that demeans an entire race of people, people within a specific ethnic group, or an individual because he or she belongs to a specific race or ethnic group. , sexist Language that demeans or excludes one of the biological sexes. , and any other form of speech that demeans or belittles a group of people. Hate speech from all sides of the political spectrum in our society is detrimental to ethical communication. As such, we as speakers should be acutely aware of how an audience may perceive words that could be considered bigoted. For example, suppose a school board official involved in budget negotiations used the word “shekels” to refer to money, which he believes the teachers’ union should be willing to give up. Associated Press. (2011, May 5). Conn. shekel shellacking. New York Post . The remark would be likely to prompt accusations of anti-Semitism and to distract listeners from any constructive suggestions the official might have for resolving budget issues. Although the official might insist that he meant no offense, he damaged the ethical climate of the budget debate by using a word associated with bigotry.

We Are Committed to the Courageous Expression of Personal Convictions in Pursuit of Fairness and Justice

We believe that finding and bringing to light situations of inequality and injustice within our society is important. Public speaking has been used throughout history to point out inequality and injustice, from Patrick Henry arguing against the way the English government treated the American colonists and Sojourner Truth describing the evils of slavery to Martin Luther King Jr.’s “I Have a Dream” speech and Army Lt. Dan Choi’s speeches arguing that the military’s “don’t ask, don’t tell policy” is unjust. Many social justice movements have started because young public speakers have decided to stand up for what they believe is fair and just.

We Advocate Sharing Information, Opinions, and Feelings When Facing Significant Choices While Also Respecting Privacy and Confidentiality

Similarly, we have an obligation to respect others’ privacy and confidentiality when speaking. If information is obtained from printed or publicly distributed material, it’s perfectly appropriate to use that information without getting permission, as long as you cite it. However, when you have a great anecdote one of your friends told you in confidence, or access to information that is not available to the general public, it is best to seek permission before using the information in a speech.

We Accept Responsibility for the Short- and Long-Term Consequences of Our Own Communication and Expect the Same of Others

Furthermore, attempting to persuade a group of people to take any action means you should make sure that you understand the consequences of that action. Whether you are persuading people to vote for a political candidate or just encouraging them to lose weight, you should know what the short-term and long-term consequences of that decision could be. While our predictions of short-term and long-term consequences may not always be right, we have an ethical duty to at least think through the possible consequences of our speeches and the actions we encourage.

Practicing Ethical Public Speaking

Thus far in this section we’ve introduced you to the basics of thinking through the ethics of public speaking. Knowing about ethics is essential, but even more important to being an ethical public speaker is putting that knowledge into practice by thinking through possible ethical pitfalls prior to standing up and speaking out. Table 2.1 "Public Speaking Ethics Checklist" is a checklist based on our discussion in this chapter to help you think through some of these issues.

Table 2.1 Public Speaking Ethics Checklist

Key Takeaways

All eight of the principles espoused in the NCA Credo for Ethical Communication can be applied to public speaking. Some of the principles relate more to the speaker’s role in communication, while others relate to both the speaker’s and the audience’s role in public speech.
When preparing a speech, it is important to think about the ethics of public speaking from the beginning. When a speaker sets out to be ethical in his or her speech from the beginning, arriving at ethical speech is much easier.
Fill out the “Public Speaking Ethics Checklist” while thinking about your first speech. Did you mark “true” for any of the statements? If so, why? What can you do as a speaker to get to the point where you can check them all as “false”?
Robert is preparing a speech about legalizing marijuana use in the United States. He knows that his roommate wrote a paper on the topic last semester and asks his roommate about the paper in an attempt to gather information. During his speech, Robert orally cites his roommate by name as a source of his information but does not report that the source is his roommate, whose experience is based on writing a paper. In what ways does Robert’s behavior violate the guidelines set out in the NCA Credo for Ethical Communication?

2.3 Free Speech

Define the concept of free speech and discuss its origins.
Discuss the First Amendment to the US Constitution in terms of free speech.
Describe how free speech relates to other freedoms guaranteed by the First Amendment to the US Constitution.

What Is Free Speech?

Free speech has been a constitutional right since the founding of our nation, and according to Merriam Webster’s Dictionary of Law , free speech The right to express information, ideas, and opinions free of government restrictions based on content and subject only to reasonable limitations. entails “the right to express information, ideas, and opinions free of government restrictions based on content and subject only to reasonable limitations (as the power of the government to avoid a clear and present danger) esp. as guaranteed by the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution.” Freedom of speech. (n.d.). In Merriam-Webster’s dictionary of law . Retrieved from Dictionary.com website: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/freedom%20of%20speech Free speech is especially important to us as public speakers because expressing information and ideas is the purpose of public speaking. It is also important to audiences of public speeches because free speech allows us to hear and consider multiple points of view so that we can make more informed decisions.

The First Amendment to the Constitution

Free speech was so important to the founders of the United States that it is included in the first of the ten amendments to the US Constitution that are known as the Bill of Rights. This is not surprising, considering that many American colonists had crossed the Atlantic to escape religious persecution and that England had imposed many restrictions on personal freedoms during the colonial era. The text of the First Amendment reads, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” National Archives and Records Administration. (2011). Bill of rights transcription. Retrieved from http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/bill_of_rights_transcript.html

The freedoms protected by the First Amendment may seem perfectly natural today, but they were controversial in 1791 when the Bill of Rights was enacted. Proponents argued that individuals needed protection from overreaching powers of government, while opponents believed these protections were unnecessary and that amending them to the Constitution could weaken the union.

Freedom of speech, of the press, of religion, of association, of assembly and petition are all guaranteed in amendments to the US Constitution. Free speech allows us to exercise our other First Amendment rights. Freedom of assembly means that people can gather to discuss and protest issues of importance to them. If free speech were not protected, citizens would not be able to exercise their right to protest about activities such as war or policies such as health care reform.

Free speech does not mean, however, that every US citizen has the legal right to say anything at any time. If your speech is likely to lead to violence or other illegal acts, it is not protected. One recent example is a 2007 Supreme Court decision in the Morse et al. v. Frederick case. In this case, a high school student held up a sign reading “Bong Hits 4 Jesus” across from the school during the 2002 Olympic Torch Relay. The principal suspended the teenager, and the teen sued the principal for violating his First Amendment rights. Ultimately, the court decided that the principal had the right to suspend the student because he was advocating illegal behavior. Supreme Court of the United States. (2007). Syllabus: Morse et al. v. Frederick. No. 06–278. Argued March 19, 2007–Decided June 25, 2007. Retrieved from http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/06pdf/06-278.pdf

The meaning of “free speech” is constantly being debated by politicians, judges, and the public, even within the United States, where this right has been discussed for over two hundred years. As US citizens, it is important to be aware of both the protections afforded by free speech and its limits so that we can be both articulate speakers and critical listeners when issues such as antiwar protests at military funerals or speech advocating violence against members of specific groups come up within our communities.

Source: Photo courtesy of Noclip, http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Supreme_Court_Front_Dusk.jpg .

Freedom of speech is the right to express information, ideas, and opinions free of government restrictions based on content and subject only to reasonable limitations.
Free speech helps us to enact other freedoms protected by the First Amendment, including freedom of assembly and freedom of religion. Without free speech, we would not be able to assemble in groups to publically debate and challenge government policies or laws. Without free speech, we would not be able to exercise our rights to express our religious views even when they are at odds with popular opinion.
What are your campus’s internal codes on speech and free speech? Do you have free speech areas on campus? If so, how are they used and regulated?
Some college campuses have experienced controversy in recent years when they invited speakers such as Ward Churchill or those who deny that the Holocaust occurred to campus. Discuss in a small group how these controversies reflect the importance of free speech in our society.

2.4 Chapter Exercises

Speaking ethically.

Jerold Follinsworth is an elected official on the verge of giving the most important speech of his entire life, but he doesn’t know which speech to give. He looks down at his hands and sees two very different speeches. The speech in his left hand clearly admits to the public that he has been having an affair with a senior staffer. The allegations have been around for a few months, but his office has been denying the allegations as slanderous attacks from his opponents. In his right hand, he has a speech that sidesteps the affair allegations and focuses on an important policy issue. If Jerold gives the speech in his left hand, an important initiative for his state will be defeated by his political enemies. If Jerold gives the speech in his right hand, he will be deceiving the public, but it will lead to increased growth in jobs for his state. Jerold asked his top speech writer to prepare both speeches. As Jerold waits in the wings for his press conference, he’s just not sure which speech he should give.

What ethical communication choices do you see Jerold as having in this case?
How would you analyze Jerold’s decision using the ethical pyramid?
How would you apply the National Communication Association (NCA) Credo for Ethical Communication to this case?

End-of-Chapter Assessment

Darlene is in the process of preparing a speech on global warming. She knowingly includes a source from a fringe group that has been previously discredited, but she thinks the source will really help her drive her argument home. What combination of the ethics pyramid does this case represent?

intentional use of bad means
intentional use of good means
unintentional use of bad means
unintentional use of good means
intentional use of neutral means

Which of the following is not an ethical aspect described by the NCA Credo for Ethical Communication?

freedom of expression
access to communication resources and opportunities
accepting responsibility for one’s own communication
respecting a source before evaluating her or his message
promoting ethical standards in business

PRDV217: Introduction to Sales

Ethics in public speaking.

This article offers guidance on ensuring you do not mislead your audience. It touches on the importance of honest communication and the long-term consequences of violating your audience's trust.

The study of ethics in human communication is hardly a recent endeavor. One of the earliest discussions of ethics in communication (and particularly in public speaking) was conducted by the ancient Greek philosopher Plato in his dialogue Phaedrus. In the centuries since Plato's time, an entire subfield within the discipline of human communication has developed to explain and understand communication ethics.

Communication Code of Ethics

National Communication Association Credo for Ethical Communication

We advocate truthfulness, accuracy, honesty, and reason as essential to the integrity of communication.

We endorse freedom of expression, diversity of perspective, and tolerance of dissent to achieve the informed and responsible decision making fundamental to a civil society.

We strive to understand and respect other communicators before evaluating and responding to their messages.

We promote access to communication resources and opportunities as necessary to fulfill human potential and contribute to the well-being of families, communities, and society.

We promote communication climates of caring and mutual understanding that respect the unique needs and characteristics of individual communicators.

We condemn communication that degrades individuals and humanity through distortion, intimidation, coercion, and violence, and through the expression of intolerance and hatred.

We are committed to the courageous expression of personal convictions in pursuit of fairness and justice.

We advocate sharing information, opinions, and feelings when facing significant choices while also respecting privacy and confidentiality.

We accept responsibility for the short- and long-term consequences of our own communication and expect the same of others.

Applying the NCA Credo to Public Speaking

We Advocate Truthfulness, Accuracy, Honesty, and Reason as Essential to the Integrity of Communication

As public speakers, one of the first ethical areas we should be concerned with is information honesty. While there are cases where speakers have blatantly lied to an audience, it is more common for speakers to prove a point by exaggerating, omitting facts that weigh against their message, or distorting information. We believe that speakers build a relationship with their audiences, and that lying, exaggerating, or distorting information violates this relationship. Ultimately, a speaker will be more persuasive by using reason and logical arguments supported by facts rather than relying on emotional appeals designed to manipulate the audience. It is also important to be honest about where all your information comes from in a speech. As speakers, examine your information sources and determine whether they are biased or have hidden agendas. For example, you are not likely to get accurate information about nonwhite individuals from a neo-Nazi website. While you may not know all your sources of information firsthand, you should attempt to find objective sources that do not have an overt or covert agenda that skews the argument you are making. The second part of information honesty is to fully disclose where we obtain the information in our speeches. As ethical speakers, it is important to always cite your sources of information within the body of a speech. Whether you conducted an interview or read a newspaper article, you must tell your listeners where the information came from. We mentioned earlier in this chapter that using someone else's words or ideas without giving credit is called plagiarism . The word "plagiarism" stems from the Latin word plagiaries, or kidnapper. The American Psychological Association states in its publication manual that ethical speakers do not claim "words and ideas of another as their own; they give credit where credit is due". In the previous sentence, we placed quotation marks around the sentence to indicate that the words came from the American Psychological Association and not from us. When speaking informally, people sometimes use "air quotes" to signal direct quotations - but this is not a recommended technique in public speaking. Instead, speakers need to verbally tell an audience when they are using someone else's information. The consequences for failing to cite sources during public speeches can be substantial. When Senator Joseph Biden was running for president of the United States in 1988, reporters found that he had plagiarized portions of his stump speech from British politician Neil Kinnock. Biden was forced to drop out of the race as a result. More recently, the student newspaper at Malone University in Ohio alleged that the university president, Gary W. Streit, had plagiarized material in a public speech. Streit retired abruptly as a result. Even if you are not running for president of the United States or serving as a college president, citing sources is important to you as a student. Many universities have policies that include dismissal from the institution for student plagiarism of academic work, including public speeches. Failing to cite your sources might result, at best, in lower credibility with your audience and, at worst, in a failing grade on your assignment or expulsion from your school. While we will talk in more detail about plagiarism later in this book, we cannot emphasize enough the importance of giving credit to the speakers and authors whose ideas we pass on within our own speeches and writing. Speakers tend to fall into one of three major traps with plagiarism. The first trap is failing to tell the audience the source of a direct quotation. In the previous paragraph, we used a direct quotation from the American Psychological Association; if we had not used the quotation marks and clearly listed where the cited material came from, you, as a reader, would not have known the source of that information. To avoid plagiarism, you always need to tell your audience when you are directly quoting information within a speech. The second plagiarism trap public speakers fall into is paraphrasing what someone else said or wrote without giving credit to the speaker or author. For example, you may have read a book and learned that there are three types of schoolyard bullying. In the middle of your speech you talk about those three types of schoolyard bullying. If you do not tell your audience where you found that information, you are plagiarizing. Typically, the only information you do not need to cite is information that is general knowledge. General knowledge is information that is publicly available and widely known by a large segment of society. For example, you would not need to provide a citation within a speech for the name of Delaware's capital. Although many people do not know the capital of Delaware without looking it up, this information is publicly available and easily accessible, so assigning credit to one specific source is not useful or necessary. The third plagiarism trap that speakers fall into is re-citing someone else's sources within a speech. To explain this problem, let's look at a brief segment from a research paper written by Wrench, DiMartino, Ramirez, Oviedio, and Tesfamariam: The main character on the hit Fox television show House, Dr. Gregory House, has one basic mantra, "It is a basic truth of the human condition that everybody lies. The only variable is about what". This notion that "everybody lies" is so persistent in the series that t-shirts have been printed with the slogan. Surprisingly, research has shown that most people do lie during interpersonal interactions to some degree. In a study conducted by Turner, Edgley, and Olmstead, the researchers had 130 participants record their own conversations with others. After recording these conversations, the participants then examined the truthfulness of the statements within the interactions. Only 38.5% of the statements made during these interactions were labeled as "completely honest". In this example, we see that the authors of this paragraph cited information from two external sources: Shore and Barclay and Tummer, Edgley, and Olmstead. These two groups of authors are given credit for their i deas. The authors make it clear that they (Wrench, DiMartino, Ramirez, Oviedio, and Tesfamariam) did not produce the television show House or conduct the study that found that only 38.5 percent of statements were completely honest. Instead, these authors cited information found in two other locations. This type of citation is appropriate. However, if a speaker read the paragraph and said the following during a speech, it would be plagiarism: "According to Wrench DiMartino, Ramirez, Oviedio, and Tesfamariam, in a study of 130 participants, only 38.5 percent of the responses were completely honest". In this case, the speaker is attributing the information cited to the authors of the paragraph, which is not accurate. If you want to cite the information within your speech, you need to read the original article by Turner, Edgley, and Olmstead and cite that information yourself. There are two main reasons we do this. First, Wrench, DiMartino, Ramirez, Oviedio, and Tesfamariam may have mistyped the information. Suppose the study by Turner, Edgley, and Olstead really actually found that 58.5 percent of the responses were completely honest. If you cited the revised number (38.5 percent) from the paragraph, you would be further spreading incorrect information. The second reason we do not re-cite someone else's sources within our speeches is because it is intellectually dishonest. You owe your listeners an honest description of where the facts you are relating came from, not just the name of an author who cited those facts. It is more work to trace the original source of a fact or statistic, but by doing that extra work you can avoid this plagiarism trap.

We Endorse Freedom of Expression, Diversity of Perspective, and Tolerance of Dissent to Achieve the Informed and Responsible Decision Making Fundamental to a Civil Society

This ethical principle affirms that a civil society depends on freedom of expression, diversity of perspective, and tolerance of dissent and that informed and responsible decisions can only be made if all members of society are free to express their thoughts and opinions. Further, it holds that diverse viewpoints, including those that disagree with accepted authority, are important for the functioning of a democratic society. If everyone only listened to one source of information, then we would be easily manipulated and controlled. For this reason, we believe that individuals should be willing to listen to a range of speakers on a given subject. As listeners or consumers of communication, we should realize that this diversity of perspectives enables us to be more fully informed on a subject. Imagine voting in an election after listening only to the campaign speeches of one candidate. The perspective of that candidate would be so narrow that you would have no way to accurately understand and assess the issues at hand or the strengths and weaknesses of the opposing candidates. Unfortunately, some voters do limit themselves to listening only to their candidate of choice and, as a result, base their voting decisions on incomplete - and, not infrequently, inaccurate - information. Listening to diverse perspectives includes being willing to hear dissenting voices. Dissent is by nature uncomfortable, as it entails expressing opposition to authority, often in very unflattering terms. Legal scholar Steven H. Shiffrin has argued in favor of some symbolic speech (e.g., flag burning) because we as a society value the ability of anyone to express their dissent against the will and ideas of the majority. Dissent, injustice and the meanings of America. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Ethical communicators will be receptive to dissent, no matter how strongly they may disagree with the speaker's message because they realize that a society that forbids dissent cannot function democratically. Ultimately, honoring free speech and seeking out a variety of perspectives is very important for all listeners. We will discuss this idea further in the chapter on listening.

We Strive to Understand and Respect Other Communicators before Evaluating and Responding to Their Messages

This is another ethical characteristic that is specifically directed at receivers of a message. As listeners, we often let our perceptions of a speaker's nonverbal behavior – his or her appearance, posture, mannerisms, eye contact, and so on – determine our opinions about a message before the speaker has said a word. We may also find ourselves judging a speaker based on information we have heard about him or her from other people. Perhaps you have heard from other students that a particular teacher is a really boring lecturer or is really entertaining in class. Even though you do not have personal knowledge, you may prejudge the teacher and his or her message based on information you have been given from others. The NCA credo reminds us that to be ethical listeners, we need to avoid such judgments and instead make an effort to listen respectfully; only when we have understood a speaker's viewpoint are we ready to begin forming our opinions of the message. Listeners should try to objectively analyze the content and arguments within a speech before deciding how to respond. Especially when we disagree with a speaker, we might find it difficult to listen to the content of the speech and, instead, work on creating a rebuttal the entire time the speaker is talking. When this happens, we do not strive to understand the speaker and do not respect the speaker. Of course, this does not just affect the listener in the public speaking situation. As speakers, we are often called upon to evaluate and refute potential arguments against our positions. While we always want our speeches to be as persuasive as possible, we do ourselves and our audiences a disservice when we downplay, distort, or refuse to mention important arguments from the opposing side. Fairly researching and evaluating counterarguments is an important ethical obligation for the public speaker.

We Promote Access to Communication Resources and Opportunities as Necessary to Fulfill Human Potential and Contribute to the Well-Being of Families, Communities, and Society

We Promote Communication Climates of Caring and Mutual Understanding That Respect the Unique Needs and Characteristics of Individual Communicators

Speakers need to take a two-pronged approach when addressing any audience: caring about the audience and understanding the audience. When you as a speaker truly care about your audience's needs and desires, you avoid setting up a manipulative climate. This is not to say that your audience will always perceive their own needs and desires in the same way you do, but if you make an honest effort to speak to your audience in a way that has their best interests at heart, you are more likely to create persuasive arguments that are not just manipulative appeals. Second, it is important for a speaker to create an atmosphere of mutual understanding. To do this, you should first learn as much as possible about your audience, a process called audience analysis. We will discuss this topic in more detail in the audience analysis chapter. To create a climate of caring and mutual respect, it is important for us as speakers to be open with our audiences so that our intentions and perceptions are clear. Nothing alienates an audience faster than a speaker with a hidden agenda unrelated to the stated purpose of the speech. One of our coauthors once listened to a speaker give a two-hour talk, allegedly about workplace wellness, which actually turned out to be an infomercial for the speaker's weight-loss program. In this case, the speaker clearly had a hidden (or not-so-hidden) agenda, which made the audience feel disrespected.

We Condemn Communication That Degrades Individuals and Humanity through Distortion, Intimidation, Coercion, and Violence and through the Expression of Intolerance and Hatred

This ethical principle is very important for all speakers. Hopefully, intimidation, coercion, and violence will not be part of your public speaking experiences, but some public speakers have been known to call for violence and incite mobs of people to commit attrocities. Thus distortion and expressions of intolerance and hatred are of special concern when it comes to public speaking. Distortion occurs when someone purposefully twists information in a way that detracts from its original meaning. Unfortunately, some speakers take information and use it in a manner that is not in the spirit of the original information. One place we see distortion frequently is in the political context, where politicians cite a statistic or the results of a study and either completely alter the information or use it in a deceptive manner. FactCheck.org, a project of the Annenberg Public Policy Center (http://www.factcheck.org), and the St. Petersburg Times's Politifact (http://www.politifact.com) are nonpartisan organizations devoted to analyzing political messages and demonstrating how information has been distorted. Expressions of intolerance and hatred that are to be avoided include using ageist , heterosexist , racist , sexist , and any other form of speech that demeans or belittles a group of people. Hate speech from all sides of the political spectrum in our society is detrimental to ethical communication. As such, we as speakers should be acutely aware of how an audience may perceive words that could be considered bigoted. For example, suppose a school board official involved in budget negotiations used the word "shekels" to refer to money, which he believes the teachers' union should be willing to give up. Conn. shekel shellacking. New York Post. The remark would be likely to prompt accusations of anti-Semitism and to distract listeners from any constructive suggestions the official might have for resolving budget issues. Although the official might insist that he meant no offense, he damaged the ethical climate of the budget debate by using a word associated with bigotry. At the same time, it is important for listeners to pay attention to expressions of intolerance or hatred. Extremist speakers sometimes attempt to disguise their true agendas by avoiding bigoted "buzzwords" and using mild-sounding terms instead. For example, a speaker advocating the overthrow of a government might use the term "regime change" instead of "revolution"; similarly, proponents of genocide in various parts of the world have used the term "ethnic cleansing" instead of "extermination." By listening critically to the gist of a speaker's message as well as the specific language he or she uses, we can see how that speaker views the world.

We Are Committed to the Courageous Expression of Personal Convictions in Pursuit of Fairness and Justice

We believe that finding and bringing to light situations of inequality and injustice within our society is important. Public speaking has been used throughout history to point out inequality and injustice, from Patrick Henry arguing against the way the English government treated the American colonists and Sojourner Truth describing the evils of slavery to Martin Luther King Jr.'s "I Have a Dream" speech and Army Lt. Dan Choi's speeches arguing that the military's "do not ask, do not tell policy" is unjust. Many social justice movements have started because young public speakers have decided to stand up for what they believe is fair and just.

We Advocate Sharing Information, Opinions, and Feelings When Facing Significant Choices While Also Respecting Privacy and Confidentiality

This ethical principle involves balancing personal disclosure with discretion. It is perfectly normal for speakers to want to share their own personal opinions and feelings about a topic; however, it is also important to highlight information within a speech that represents your own thoughts and feelings. Your listeners have a right to know the difference between facts and personal opinions. Similarly, we have an obligation to respect others' privacy and confidentiality when speaking. If information is obtained from printed or publicly distributed material, it is perfectly appropriate to use that information without getting permission, as long as you cite it. However, when you have a great anecdote one of your friends told you in confidence, or access to information that is not available to the general public, it is best to seek permission before using the information in a speech. This ethical obligation even has legal implications in many government and corporate contexts. For example, individuals who work for the Central Intelligence Agency are legally precluded from discussing their work in public without prior review by the agency. And companies such as Google also have policies requiring employees to seek permission before engaging in public speaking in which sensitive information might be leaked.

We Accept Responsibility for the Short- and Long-Term Consequences of Our Own Communication and Expect the Same of Others

The last statement of NCA's ethical credo may be the most important one. We live in a society where a speaker's message can literally be heard around the world in a matter of minutes, thanks to our global communication networks. Extreme remarks made by politicians, media commentators, and celebrities, as well as ordinary people, can unexpectedly "go viral" with regrettable consequences. It is not unusual to see situations where a speaker talks hatefully about a specific group, but when one of the speaker's listeners violently attacks a member of the group, the speaker insists that he or she had no way of knowing that this could possibly have happened. Washing your hands of responsibility is unacceptable: all speakers should accept responsibility for the short-term and long-term consequences of their speeches. Although it is certainly not always the speaker's fault if someone commits an act of violence, the speaker should take responsibility for her or his role in the situation. This process involves being truly reflective and willing to examine how your speech could have tragic consequences. Furthermore, attempting to persuade a group of people to take any action means you should make sure that you understand the consequences of that action. Whether you are persuading people to vote for a political candidate or just encouraging them to lose weight, you should know what the short-term and long-term consequences of that decision could be. While our predictions of short-term and long-term consequences may not always be right, we have an ethical duty to at least think through the possible consequences of our speeches and the actions we encourage.

Practicing Ethical Public Speaking

Thus far in this section we have introduced you to the basics of thinking through the ethics of public speaking. Knowing about ethics is essential, but even more important to being an ethical public speaker is putting that knowledge into practice by thinking through possible ethical pitfalls prior to standing up and speaking out.

This Public Speaking Ethics Checklist is based on our discussion in this chapter to help you think through some of these issues.

Public Speaking Ethics Checklist

Instructions: For each of the following ethical issues, check either true or false.

I have knowingly added information within my speech that is false.
I have attempted to persuade people by unnecessarily tapping into emotion rather than logic.
I have not clearly cited all the information within my speech.
I do not know who my sources of information are or what makes my sources credible.
I wrote my speech based on my own interests and really have not thought much about my audience.
I have not really thought much about my audience's needs and desires.
I have altered some of the facts in my speech to help me be more persuasive.
Some of the language in my speech may be considered bigoted.
My goal is to manipulate my audience to my point of view.
I sometimes blend in my personal opinions when discussing actual facts during the speech.
My personal opinions are just as good as facts, so I do not bother to distinguish between the two during my speech.
I have used information in my speech from a friend or colleague that probably should not be repeated.
I am using information in my speech that a source gave me even though it was technically "off the record."
It is just a speech. I really do not care what someone does with the information when I am done speaking.
I have not really thought about the short- or long-term consequences of my speech.

Scoring: For ethical purposes, all your answers should have been "false."

Key Takeaways

All eight of the principles espoused in the NCA Credo for Ethical Communication can be applied to public speaking. Some of the principles relate more to the speaker's role in communication, while others relate to both the speaker's and the audience's role in public speech.

When preparing a speech, it is important to think about the ethics of public speaking from the beginning. When a speaker sets out to be ethical in his or her speech from the beginning, arriving at ethical speech is much easier.

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

3 Chapter 3: Ethics in Public Speaking

The materials below are attributed fully to the free online Open Education Resource, Exploring Public Speaking: The Free Dalton State College Public Speaking Textbook, 4th Edition (Chapter 11). Another later chapter also discusses topics of plagiarism and AI use.

Chapter 3 Learning objectives

After reading this chapter, the student will be able to:

Explain the legal, cultural, philosophical, and social origins of ethics in public speaking
Explain the difference between plagiarism and correct appropriation of source materials
Understand the value of ethics in building a solid reputation as a speaker
Correctly use source material in a presentation

Chapter Preview

3.1 – sources of ethical stances on communication and public speaking, 3.2 – credibility and ethics, 3.3 – plagiarism.

As discussed in Chapter 1, there are many reasons to take a public speaking course. Among its numerous benefits, a public speaking course will create more self-confidence; the creation of good arguments will build your critical thinking and research skills; and you will meet new people in your class in a different way and be exposed to their ideas . Also, the course will prepare you for presentations you will be expected to give in later classes (and believe us, there will be many), in your civic and personal life, and for your eventual career.

Another very important reason to take a public speaking course such as this one goes beyond these immediate personal benefits. Public speaking, or “rhetoric” as it was originally called, has long been considered a method in Western culture of building community, facilitating self-government, sharing important ideas, and creating policies. In fact, these are the reasons the ancient Athenian Greeks emphasized that all citizens should be educated in rhetoric: so that they could take part in civil society. Aristotle said that if a man was expected to defend himself physically, he should also be able to defend his ideas rhetorically, that is, t hrough persuasive public speaking:

It is absurd to hold that a man ought to be ashamed of being unable to defend himself with his limbs, but not of being unable to defend himself with speech and reason, when the use of rational speech is more distinctive of a human being than the use of his limbs. (Rhetoric, Book I, p. 6).

Therefore, public speaking has a social as well as a personal purpose and function. For that reason, the ethics of public speaking and communication in general should be addressed in any study of public speaking. A public speaker, whether delivering a speech in a classroom, board room, civic meeting, or in any other venue must uphold certain ethical standards. These standards will allow the audience to make informed choices, to uphold credibility as a source of information, and to avoid repercussions of bad ethical choices.

To this end, this chapter will deal with the subject of ethics. Ethics refers to the branch of philosophy that involves determinations of what is right and moral . On a personal level , it is your own standard of what you should and should not do in the various situations or in all situations. Although ethics are based on personal decisions and values, they are also influenced by factors outside of you. Over the next few pages, we will look at various ways ethics, particularly ethics related to speech, have been thought about. In reading, you should seek to determine how you would explain your own ethical standard for communication. A long with being able to articulate what you would not do, you should have an appreciation for why doing the right thing is important to you.

the branch of philosophy that involves determinations of what is right and moral

One of “right things” and most important ways that we speak ethically is to use material from others correctly. Occasionally we hear in the news media about a political speaker who uses the words of other speakers without attribution or of scholars who use pages out of another scholar’s work without consent or citation. Usually the discussion of plagiarism stays within the community where it occurred, but there is still damage done to the “borrower’s” reputation as an ethical person and scholar.

Why does it matter if a speaker or writer commits plagiarism? Why and how do we judge a speaker as ethical? Why, for example, do we value originality and correct citation of sources in public life as well as the academic world, especially in the United States? These are not new questions, and some of the answers lie in age-old philosophies of communication.

Legal Origins of Ethics in Public Speaking

The First Amendment to the Constitution is one of the most cherished and debated in the Bill of Rights. “Congress shall make no law abridging freedom of speech . . . or of the press” has been discussed in many contexts for over two hundred and thirty years. Thomas Emerson (1970), a Constitutional scholar and Yale Law Professor, asserted that freedom of expression is more than just a right. It is a necessity for having the kind of society we want as Americans. Although we think of “freedom of the press” today as referring to mass media and journalism, “press” here refers to publishing of books, magazines, or pamphlets by anyone.

One of the bases of the First Amendment is an essay written by John Milton in the 1600s, Aereopagitica. This essay on freedom of speech is where the phrases “free marketplace of ideas” and “truth will arise from debate of all ideas” originated. Milton lived in a time when the King of England or Parliament could “censor” published material or speakers, either by keeping it from being published and distributed (later called “prior restraint”), by destroying the publications afterward, or by punishing the producers of the content, sometimes harshly .

In the twentieth century, “freedom of speech” has been generalized into a freedom of expression. This was especially true in the important Supreme Court cases on the First Amendment in the 1950s through 1970s. According to Emerson (1970), such expression is important to our development as human beings individually and in a democracy. Thanks to these historical precedents, we can express ourselves freely in our communities and classrooms, keeping in mind ethical responsibilities to present serious, honest, factual, and well-supported speeches as a matter of respect to your listeners . Additionally, although the First Amendment to the Constitution is usually interpreted by the Supreme Court and lower courts to mean almost no restrictions on freedom of expression, there are a few instances in which the government is held to have a “compelling interest” in controlling, stopping, or preventing certain types of free expression.

One of these instances has to do with threats on the life of the President of the United States, although threats of physical harm against anyone might also result in penalties . Another instance of restrictions on freedom of expression is in those cases where the speaker has the opportunity and means and likelihood of inciting an audience to violence (this is the old “yelling ‘fire’ in a crowded theatre” example). The government has also allowed local governments to have reasonable requirements to avoid mobs or public danger or to uphold community standards, such as permits for parades or limiting how many people can meet in a certain size of building. “Reasonable” is sometimes a matter of debate, as the extensive history of Supreme Court cases on the First Amendment shows.

An other type of restriction on freedom of speech is defamatory speech , which is defined in the United States as:

a false statement of fact that damages a person’s character, fame or reputation . It must be a false statement of fact; statements of opinion, however insulting they may be, cannot be defamation under U.S. law. Under U.S. defamation law, there are different standards for public officials [and public figures] and private individuals. (U.S. Department of State, 2013)

Defamatory Speech

a false statement of fact that damages a person’s character, fame, or reputation

With the Internet and social media, these issues become more complicated, of course. In the past someone could express himself or herself only in limited ways: standing on a street corner, attending a public meeting, putting the words on paper and distributing them, or maybe getting on radio or television (if allowed or if wealthy). Today, almost anyone with a laptop, a webcam, an ISP, and technical know-how can be as powerful in getting a message to the masses as someone owning a newspaper one hundred years ago. While most people use technology and the Internet for fun, profit, or self-expression, some use it for hurt—bullying, defamation, even spreading terrorism. The judicial system is trying to keep up with the challenges that the digital age brings to protecting free expression while sheltering us from the negative consequences of some forms of free expression.

Cultural and Religious Origins of Ethics in Communication

It is hard to separate life aspects such as legal, cultural, religious, and social. Many Americans would say they hold to the Golden Rule: “Do unto others as you would have them do to you.” The Golden Rule is seen as a positive expression of fairness, equity, and trust. Even if there is no legal ruling hanging over us, we expect honest communication and return it. The Golden Rule is related to and a step beyond the “Law of Reciprocity” that determines so much of our social interaction. We also value straightforwardness; respect for the individual’s freedom of choice; getting access to full information; consistency between action and words; taking responsibility for one’s own mistakes (sometimes necessitating an apology and accepting consequences) ; and protection of privacy . We fear public humiliation and do not want to violate community norms. We also usually view ourselves as honest and ethical people .

Most religions teach the value of truthfulness and that lying intentionally is wrong. The Books of Proverbs, the Ten Commandments, the Mosaic Law, and Jesus Christ’s teaching all point to the immorality of lying and the destruction lying brings personally and communally. Quranic teaching condemns lying, and Buddhism teaches that followers should not deliberately lie. Individuals internalize the norms of their cultures and religions and makes them work for him or her. Sometimes we try to find justification for times when we are untruthful, such as to smooth over relationships and say things that serve as “social lubrication” (Floyd, 2017). Upbringing and family teachings, religious values, experiences, peers, and just plain old “gut reaction” as well as understanding of the First Amendment contribute to our ethical behavior

Philosophers and Communication Ethics

Philosophers throughout history have also written on the subject of communication and public speaking ethics. In fact, one of the first philosophers, Plato , objected to the way rhetoric was practiced in his day, because “it made the worse case appear the better.” In other words, the professional public speakers, who could be hired to defend someone in court or the assembly, knew and used techniques that could deceive audiences and turn them from truth . Aristotle responded to this concern from his teacher Plato in his work, Rhetoric . Later, Quintilian, a Roman teacher of rhetoric, wrote that rhetoric was “the good man speaking well, ” meaning the speaker must meet the Roman Republic’s definition of a virtuous man.

In more modern times, English philosophers John Stuart Mill (1806-1873) and Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832) introduced utilitarianism, which presents the ethic of “The greatest good for the greatest number;” that is, whatever benefits the most people is right . A related philosophy, pragmatism , was first discussed by Charles Sanders Pierce (1839-1914). Pragmatists judge actions by their practical consequences. Some ethicists would differ with the pragmatic position, claiming it supports an “ends justify the means” philosophy. When we say “the ends justify the means,” we are saying that a generally unethical action (intentional misstatement of truth, withholding information, or taking any someone’s freedom of choice) is ethical as long as something good comes from it. Many scholars of ethical communication would disagree with the “ends justify the means” philosophy.

The philosopher Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) proposed what was been called the Categorical Imperative: “Act only according to that maxim by which you can at the same time will that it would become a universal law.” To paraphrase, any behavior we engage in should be what we think everyone else on the planet should do ethically . I n the twentieth century, J ean-Paul Sartre and others called “existentialists” emphasized that the ability and necessity to freely choose our actions is what makes us human, but we are accountable for all our choices. Jurgen Habermas, a more recent scholar, emphasizes the “equal opportunity for participation” of the communication partners (Johannessen, Valde, & Whedbe, 2008).

This very brief overview of ethics in general and in communication specifically is designed to let you know that the best minds have grappled with what is right and wrong when it comes to expression. But what is the practical application? We believe it is adherence to the factual truth and respect for your audience: in this case, your classmates, peers, and your instructor. An individual might be guided by the Categorical Imperative approach, the pragmatic philosophy, the Judeo-Christian view of “thou shalt not lie” and “speaking the truth in love” (Ephesians 4:15), the Golden Rule, freedom with accountability, or some other view. However, respect for your audience means that you will do your best to present factual, well-documented information designed to improve their lives and help them make informed, intelligent decisions with it .

In addition to respect for the humanity, intelligence, and dignity of your audience, you should be conscious of two other aspects related to ethics of communication: credibility and plagiarism .

When Aristotle used the term ethos in the 5th century B.C.E. to describe one of the means of persuasion, he defined it as the “wisdom, sagacity, and character of the rhetor” (see Chapter 13 for more coverage of ethos and Aristotle’s other artistic proofs). Modern scholars of communication and persuasion speak more about “ credibility ” as an attitude the audience has toward the speaker, based on both reality and perception , rather than an innate trait of the speaker . Audience members trust the speaker to varying degrees, based on the evidence and knowledge they have about the speaker and how that lines up with certain factors:

Similarity: does the speaker have experiences, values, and beliefs in common with the audience? Can the audience relate to the speaker bec ause of these commonalities?
Character: does the speaker, in word and action, in the speech and in everyday life, show honesty and integrity?
Competence: does the speaker show that he/she has expertise and sound knowledge about the topic, especially through firsthand experience? And does the speaker show competence in his/her ability to communicate that expertise?
Good will: does the audience perceive the speaker to have ethical intentions toward the audience?

In addition to these key areas will be the audience’s perceptions, o r even gut feelings, about more intangible characteristics of the speaker, such as appearance, friendliness, sense of humor, likability, appearance, poise, and communication ability. Many of these traits are conveyed through nonverbal aspects, such as facial expression, eye contact, good posture, and appropriate gestures (see Chapter 11 on Delivery).

Understandably, the same speaker will have a different level of credibility with different audiences. For example, in regard to presidential campaigns, it is interesting to listen to how different people respond to and “trust” different candidates. Donald Trump entered the presidential race as a Republican nominee and quickly became a frontrunner in many of the early polls and primaries, eventually winning the Electoral College votes, to the surprise of many. Those who voted for him often stated that they value his candor and willingness to say what he thinks because they perceive that as honest and different from other politicians. Others think he makes unwise and thoughtless statements, and they see that as a lack of competence and demeanor to be the national leader. Donald Trump is the same person, but different audiences respond to his behavior and statements in divergent ways.

The point is that character and competence are both valued by those who trust and those who distrust President Trump and the audience’s perceptions contribute to his credibility (or lack of it). However, these groups express their values in different ways. When trying to develop your own credibility as a speaker with an audience, you have to keep in mind all four of the factors listed above. To portray oneself as “similar” to the audience but to do so deceptively will not contribute to credibility in the long run. To only pretend to have good will and want the best for the audience will also have a short-term effect. And to intentionally misrepresent your background, such as experience and credentials, is clearly unethical.

Not only does a speaker’s level of credibility change or vary from audience to audience, it is also likely to change even during the presentation. These changes in credibility have been labeled as initial, derived, and terminal credibility .

Initial credibility is, as you would imagine, the speaker’s credibility at the beginning of or even before the speech. T here are a number of factors that would contribute to the initial credibility, even such matters as the “recommendation” of the person who introduces the speaker to the audience. Any knowledge the audience has of the speaker prior to the speech adds to the initial credibility. The initial credibility is important, of course, because it will influence the receptivity of the audience or how well they will listen and be open to the speaker’s ideas. Initial credibility can be influenced also by the perception that the speaker is not well dressed, prepared, or confident at the very beginning. Initial credibility is why how you walk to the lectern and give your introduction matter.

Initial Credibility

A speaker’s credibility at the beginning of or even before the speech

Derived credibility is how the audience members judge the speaker’s credibility and trustworthiness throughout the process of the speech, which also can range from point to point in the speech. P erhaps you have seen those videos on a news program that show a political speaker on one pane of the video and a graph of the audience’s response in real time to the speaker’s message, usually noted as “approval rating” as the politician speaks . This could be based on the perception of the speaker’s presentation style (delivery), language, specific opinions or viewpoints on subjects, open-mindedness, honesty, and other factors. T he point of the derived credibility is that credibility is an active concept that is always changing.

Derived Credibility

a speaker’s credibility and trustworthiness (as judged by the audience members) throughout the process of the speech, which also can range from point to point in the speech

Finally, terminal credibility is, as you would think, credibility at the end of the speech. The obvious importance of terminal credibility is that it would factor into the audience’s final decision about what to do with the information, arguments, or appeals of the speaker – in other words, his or her persuasiveness . It would also determine whether the audience would listen to the speaker again in the future. The terminal credibility can be seen as a result of the initial and derived credibility.

Terminal Credibility

a speaker’s credibility at the end of the speech

Terminal credibility may end up being lower than the initial credibility, but the goal of any speaker should be to have higher terminal credibility . From an ethics standpoint, of course, credibility should not be enhanced by being untruthful with an audience, by misrepresenting one’s viewpoint to please an audience, or by “pandering” to an audience (flattering them). One of the primary attributes of credibility at any stage should be transparency and honesty with the audience .

In conclusion, speaker credibility does not exist alone. It is supported by a number of factors, including Aristotle’s other two traditional forms of persuasion, logos (logic, evidence, good reasoning, lack of fallacious arguments) and pathos (personal and emotional appeals) .

Although there are many ways that you could undermine your ethical stance before an audience, the one that stands out and is committed most commonly in academic contexts is plagiarism . A dictionary definition of plagiarism would be “the act of using another person’s words or ideas without giving credit to that person” (Merriam-Webster, 2015). According to the student help website Plagiarism.org, sponsored by WriteCheck, plagiarism is often thought of as “copying another’s work or borrowing someone else’s original ideas” (“What is Plagiarism?”, 2014). However, this source goes on to say that the common definition may mislead some people. Plagiarism also includes:

the act of using another person’s words or ideas without giving credit to that person

Turning in someone else’s work as your own;
Copying words or ideas from someone else without giving credit;
Failing to put quotation marks around an exact quotation correctly;
Giving incorrect information about the source of a quotation;
Changing words but copying the sentence structure of a source without giving credit;
Copying so many words or ideas from a source that it makes up the majority of your work, whether you give credit or not.

Plagiarism exists outside of the classroom and is a temptation in business, creative endeavors, and politics. However, in the classroom, your instructor will probably take the most immediate action if he or she discovers your plagiarism either from personal experience or through using plagiarism detection (or what is also called “originality checking”) software . Many learning management systems, perhaps such as the one used at your institution, now have a plagiarism detection program embedded in the function where you submit assignments.

Types of Plagiarism

In our long experience of teaching, we have encountered many instances of students presenting work they claim to be original and their own when it is not. We have also seen that students often do not intend to plagiarize but, due to poor training in high school, still are committing an act that could result in a failing grade or worse. Generally, t here are three levels of plagiarism: stealing, sneaking, and borrowing . Sometimes these types of plagiarism are intentional, and sometimes they occur unintentionally (you may not know you are plagiarizing). However, as everyone knows, “Ignorance of the law is not an excuse for breaking it.” So let’s familiarize you with how plagiarism occurs in order to prevent it from happening.

There is a saying in academia: “ If you steal from one source, that is plagiarism; if you steal from twelve, that is scholarship.” Whoever originated this saying may have intended for it to be humorous, but it is a misrepresentation of both plagiarism and scholarship.

Most colleges and universities have a policy that penalizes or forbids “self-plagiarism.” This means that you can’t use a paper or outline that you presented in another class a second time. You may think, “How can this be plagiarism or wrong if I wrote both and in my work I cited sources correctly?” The main reason is that by submitting it to your instructor, you are still claiming it is original, first-time work for the assignment in that particular class. Your instructor may not mind if you use some of the same sources from the first time it was submitted, but he or she expects you to follow the instructions for the assignment and prepare an original assignment. In a sense, this situation is also a case of unfairness, since the other students do not have the advantage of having written the paper or outline already.

Another issue that often comes up with students happens when two or more students, perhaps in the same section or different sections of the same course and same instructor, submit the same assignment. When confronted, the student say, “We worked on it together.” If your instructor wants you to work collaboratively, he or she will make that clear. Otherwise, do not do this–the situation usually ends quite badly for students.

In “sneaking plagiarism,” instead of taking work as a whole from another source, the student will copy two out of every three sentences and mix them up so they don’t appear in the same order as in the original work. Perhaps the student will add a fresh introduction, a personal example or two, and an original conclusion. This “sneaky” plagiarism is easy today due to the Internet and the word processing functions of cutting and pasting.

In fact, many students do not see this as the same thing as stealing because they think “I did some research, I looked some stuff up, and I added some of my own work.” Unfortunately, this approach is only marginally better than stealing and will probably end up in the same penalties as the first type of plagiarism. Why? Because no source has been credited, and the student has “misappropriated” the expression of the ideas as well as the ideas themselves. Interestingly, this type of plagiarism can lead to copyright violation if the work with the plagiarism is published.

Most of the time students do not have to worry about copyright violation when they correctly use and cite material from a source. This is because in academic environments, “fair use” is the rule . In short, you are not making any money from using the copyrighted material, such as from a published book. You are only using it for learning purposes and not to make money, so “quoting” (using verbatim) with proper citation a small amount of the material is acceptable for a college class.

If, however, you were going to try to publish and sell an article or book and “borrowed” a large section of material without specifically obtaining permission from the original author, you would be guilty of copyright violation and by extension make your organization or company also guilty. When you enter your career field, the “fair use” principle no longer applies and you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holder and pay fees to use all or portions of a work. For more information on this very important and often misunderstood subject, visit the Creative Commons website and the Library of Congress.

One area in speeches where students are not careful about citing is on their presentational slides. If a graphic or photo is borrowed from a website (that is, you did not design it), there should be a citation in small letters on the slide. The same would be true of borrowed quotations, data, and ideas. Students also like to put their “works cited” or “references” on the last slide, but this really does not help the audience or get around the possibility of plagiarism .

The third type of plagiarism is “borrowing.” In this case, the student is not stealing wholesale. He or she may actually even give credit for the material, either correctly or incorrectly. He might say, “According to the official website of . . .” or “As found in an article in the Journal of Psychology , Dr. John Smith wrote . . .” Sounds good, right? Well, yes and no. It depends on whether the student has borrowed in a “sneaky way” ( cutting and pasting passages together but this time indicating where the sections came from ) or if the student is using the ideas but not the exact wording. In other words, h as t he student adequately, correctly, and honestly paraphrased or summarized the borrowed material, or just “strung the sources together” with some “according to’s”?

Students often are puzzled about what and when to cite borrowed material from sources. At this point, your instructor may have specific instructions, and you should always follow those first. However, in most cases you can go by the “repeated information” rule. If you are doing research and access ten sources, and over half of them have the same piece of information (usually a historical or scientific fact or statistic), you can assume this is “common knowledge.” That is, it is common to anyone who knows anything about the subject, and then you do not have to have a citation. If you find a piece of information in one source only, it probably represents the original research or viewpoint of that writer, and should be cited clearly. On the other hand, there are exceptions. An often-cited or used piece of information has an original source, such as a government agency, and you would be better off to find the original source and cite that. Secondly, citing sources adds to your credibility as a prepared speaker. Again, your instructor’s directions on what and how much your cite bear upon this advice. Generally, it is better to err on the side of citing more than less.

Ethically Crediting Sources

In using source material correctly, a speaker does three things:

A speech is quite different. Saying “According to Jones, p. 78,” really does very little for the audience. They can’t turn to the back of the paper. They don’t have a way, other than oral communication, to understand the type of information being cited, how recent it is, the credibility of the author you are citing and why you think he or she is a valid source, or the title of the work . It is necessary in a speech to give more complete information that would help the audience understand its value. The page number, the publishing company, and city it was published in are probably not important, but what is important is whether it is a website, a scholarly article, or a book; whether it was written in 1950 or 2010; and what is the position, background, or credentials of the source.

So, instead of “According to Jones, p. 78,” a better approach would be,

“ According to Dr. Samuel Jones, Head of Cardiology at Vanderbilt University, in a 2010 article in a prestigious medical journal…”

“In her 2012 book, The Iraq War in Context , historian Mary Smith of the University of Georgia states that…”

“In consulting the website for the American Humane Society, I found these statistics about animal abuse compiled by the Society in 2012…”

The speaker should take special care to use information that is in context and relevant . This step takes more critical thinking skills. For example, it is often easy to misinterpret statistical information (more on that in Chapter 7), or to take a quotation from an expert in one field and apply it to another field. It is also important to label facts as facts and opinions as opinions, especially when dealing with controversial subjects . In addition, be sure you understand the material you are citing before using it. If you are unsure of any words, look their definitions up so you are sure to be using the material as it is intended. Finally, it is important that you understand the type of publication or source you are using, for example, a scholarly publication in contrast to a journalistic one.
The speaker should phrase or summarize the ideas of the source into his or her own words. Paraphrasing, which is putting the words and ideas of others into one’s own authentic or personal language, is often misunderstood by students . Your instructor may walk you through an exercise to help your class understand that paraphrasing is not changing 10% of the words in a long quotation (such as two or three out of twenty) but still keeping most of the vocabulary and word order (called syntax ) of the source. You should compose the information in your own “voice” or way of expressing yourself. In fact, you would be better off to think in terms of summarizing your source material rather than paraphrasing. For one thing, you will be less likely to use too much of the original and therefore be skirting the edge of plagiarism. Secondly, you will usually want to put the main arguments of a source in your own words and make it shorter.

Here is an example of an original source and three possible ways to deal with it.

Original information, posted on CNN.com website, October 31, 2015:

“The biggest federal inmate release on record will take place this weekend. About 6,600 inmates will be released, with 16,500 expected to get out the first year. More than 40,000 federal felons could be released early over the next several years, the U.S. Sentencing Commission said. The sentencing commission decided a year ago to lower maximum sentences for nonviolent drug offenders and to make the change retro-active, with the inmate releases effective November 1, 2015. Sentences were reduced an average of 18%, the commission said. Early release will be a challenge for the inmates as well as the judicial bureaucracy” (Casarez, 2015).

With that as our original source, which of the following is truly paraphrasing?

The CNN News website says the federal government is releasing 40,000 felons from prison in the next few years.

According to a report posted on CNN’s website on October 31 of 2015, the federal government’s Sentencing Commission is beginning to release prisoners in November based on a decision made in 2014. That decision was to make maximum sentences for nonviolent drug offenders shorter by an average of 18%. Over the next several years over 40,000 federal felons could be let go. However, this policy change to early release will not be easy for the justice system or those released.

The largest release ever of federal inmates will take place in early November. At first 6,600 inmates will be released, and then over 16,000 over the first year. The U.S. Sentencing Commission says it could release over 40,000 federal felons over the upcoming years because the sentencing commission decided a year ago to lessen maximum sentences for nonviolent drug offenders and to make this happen for those already in jail. When the Sentencing Commission says that when it made that decision, the sentences were reduced an average of 18%. Early release will be a challenge for the felons as well as the judicial system. This came from a story on CNN News website in later October 2015.

If you chose the second citation, you would be correct. The first version does not really interpret the original statement correctly, and the third choice imitates the original almost entirely. Choice 2, on the other hand, is in completely different language and identifies the source of the information clearly and at the beginning.

This exercises may raise the question, “Should I always paraphrase or summarize rather than directly quote a source?” There are times when it is appropriate to use a source’s exact wording, but quoting a source exactly should be done sparingly—sort of like using hot sauce! You should have a good reason for it, such as that the source is highly respected, has said the idea in a compelling way, or the material is well known and others would recognize it. If you do, you should make it clear you are quoting them exactly by the way you introduce and end the borrowed material.

As mentioned before, students often have not been trained to use source material correctly and plagiarize unintentionally. But like the old saying goes, “Ignorance of the law is no excuse.” You will still be held accountable whether you understand or not, so now, in your early college career, is the time you should learn to cite source material correctly in oral and written communication.

Something to Think About

In Appendix B you will find more information about plagiarism.

After reading about ethics in communication, what do you think the most important consideration in ethical speaking? What is the second? The third? Could the first, second, and third ever come into conflict?

Why do you think it is so hard for students to learn to cite sources appropriately?

The following exercise might be helpful for you to develop an understanding of orally citing your sources.

Choose one of your sources for an upcoming speech for this exercise. On a sheet of paper, answer these 9 questions.

Is this information you found in a unique source, or information that was repeated in all or most of your sources? (This may bear upon whether you need to cite the information or not.)
Who is the original author or “speaker” of this quotation or material?
What is the title of source?
Is it a primary or secondary source? Is the writer quoting someone else (secondary) or is the author the one who discovered the knowledge/information? If the source is secondary, who is being quoted or cited originally?
What do you know about the source of the citation? Is she/he an expert, such as a scientist, doctor, government official, college professor, etc?
Where did you find the article? In what journal or magazine, on what website, in what book?
If a website, who sponsors the website (what organization, government, company)?
When was this information published? What is the date on it?
Are you repeating the source’s words exactly or just abstracting (summarizing) what was said? Which would be better, in this case?

If you had to pick 5 of the 7 above to put in your speech, which would you use, based on the three criteria of 1. Audience can find it 2. It makes you look more credible, and 3. It is ethical? Put a star by them.

If you had to pick 4 of the 7, which one would you take out from the previous question? (Cross it out)

It is not necessary to say all of this information, but most of it should be included in the citation. This is how a speech citation is different from a paper. The audience does not have access to this information unless you say it.

Now, write how you would cite this source in the speech. Some stem phrases would be “According to . . .” “In the article. . .” “On a webpage entitled . . .” “On the website for the . . . . organization. . .” “In my interview with Dr. Sam Smith, who is . . . .”

Compare with classmates.

Jennifer has an informative speech due for Dr. MacKenzie’s class. It is about why the gold standard is no longer used in American currency. She chose the subject because she had to write a paper about it in American history class. What should Jennifer consider in how she uses sources?

Jennifer’s friend Beth approaches her about having to give an informative speech for Professor Daniels’ class. Beth confesses she has been having personal problems and needs help, and she asks Jennifer to let her use some of her outline for Dr. MacKenzie’s class. What would be the best course of action for Jennifer?

CHAPTER Three ATTRIBUTION:

Manley, J. A., & Rhodes, K. (2020). Exploring Public Speaking: The Free Dalton State College Public Speaking Textbook, 4th Edition. Manifold. Retrieved from https://alg.manifoldapp.org/read/exploring-public-speaking-the-free-dalton-state-college-public-speaking-textbook-4th-edition/

Creative Commons License

Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License

AUTHORS AND CONTRIBUTORS

Barbara G. Tucker (Editor and Primary Author)

As chair of the Department of Communication at Dalton State College, Dr. Tucker oversees programs in communication, general studies, music, theatre, and interdisciplinary studies. She is a Professor of Communication and has worked in higher education for over 40 years. She lives in Ringgold, Georgia, with her husband; they have one son. She is a novelist and playwright. Her research areas are the basic course, open educational resources, historical perspectives on rhetoric, and gratitude.

Matthew LeHew (Editor)

As Assistant Professor at Dalton State College, Matthew LeHew teaches courses in public relations, integrated marketing communication, film studies, and video production. His research interests include various areas of media studies, especially examination of virtual communities for online games. He is currently writing his dissertation for the Ph.D. in Communication (Media and Society track) at Georgia State University. He lives in Marietta, Georgia with his wife, son, and two dogs.

The Public Speaking Resource Project Copyright © 2018 by Lori Halverson-Wente and Mark Halverson-Wente is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

Press ESC to close

Public Speaking Ethics: Principles of Responsible Communication

To ensure responsible communication in public speaking, this introduction sets the stage for our exploration of public speaking ethics. By defining public speaking ethics and emphasizing the importance of responsible communication, we establish the foundation for ethical practices and effective public speaking engagement.

Definition of public speaking ethics

Public speaking ethics involve moral standards and principles which guide people when giving speeches or presentations in public. This includes honesty, respect, credibility, and fairness .

To have ethical public speaking, speakers must be honest by giving accurate facts and not lying. They must also show respect to their audience by talking without insults or hurtful language.

Credibility is key too. Speakers must prove they know the subject and provide evidence. They should not exaggerate or lie which would damage their trustworthiness.

Fairness is a must. Speakers must present different points of view without bias. They should give equal attention to counterarguments, without distorting or ignoring them.

To uphold these ethics, speakers can research thoroughly before preparing. They can actively listen to their audience’s needs and interests.

They can also use visuals to help understand and engage their audience. Lastly, they should maintain eye contact with the crowd to build trust.

Adhering to ethical standards in public speaking is very important. It preserves integrity and builds trust with the audience. Honesty, respect, credibility, and fairness are essential for effective communication and inspiring trust.

Importance of responsible communication in public speaking ethics

Public speaking is a responsible communication skill . It needs ideas and info to be shared with an audience, considering their needs, perspectives, and sensitivities. Empathy and emotional intelligence are key to responsible communication. Power dynamics must be respected and not reinforced. An inclusive environment should be created where everyone is valued.

Research and fact-checking is crucial for accurate info . This maintains credibility and encourages trust. Bias should be acknowledged and consciously worked on. Effective listening is also important, to respond respectfully and create dialogue. This encourages critical thinking and openness to other perspectives.

Also Read: Find Your Passion: A Path to Self-Discovery and Fulfillment

Ethical Principles in Public Speaking

To ensure ethical principles in public speaking, address the following sub-sections: honesty and truthfulness, respect for the audience, integrity and transparency, and avoiding plagiarism. Upholding these principles fosters responsible communication and maintains the credibility and trust between speakers and their audience.

Honesty and truthfulness – Public Speaking Ethics

To show honesty and truthfulness in public speaking, one must prepare and research the topic. Get info from reliable sources like journals, websites, and expert opinions . Do this so you can confidently present ideas based on facts.

Be transparent about any biases or conflicts of interest. Acknowledge these to show commitment to honesty and avoid any doubts from the audience.

Avoid exaggeration or embellishment when presenting info. Accurately represent the facts without distorting for dramatic effect. This maintains integrity and ensures the audience gets accurate info.

If there are uncertainties or gaps in knowledge, honestly admit them. Don’t make assumptions or provide misleading info. Show humility and authenticity to prevent misinformation.

Overall, upholding principles of honesty and truthfulness in public speaking leads to credibility and trust with the audience. Listeners rely on accurate info from an honest speaker and are more likely to engage with the message.

Practice active listening skills to understand audience needs and concerns. This will help tailor the message while maintaining honesty and truthfulness.

Respect for audience – Public Speaking Ethics

Respect your audience! It’s key to a successful public speaking engagement. Show that you value them. Make them more likely to engage with your message.

Start by preparing thoroughly. Tailor your speech to their needs and interests. Show that you value their time.

Be mindful of language and tone. Use clear sentences. Avoid jargon unless needed.

Listen to their feedback. Encourage participation with interactive elements. Foster inclusivity within the audience.

Consider the physical aspects. Ensure proper lighting and acoustics. Use visual aids wisely.

Aware of cultural sensitivities. Respect values and beliefs. Avoid offensive topics unless necessary. Create an atmosphere of respect.

Integrity and transparency – Public Speaking Ethics

Be honest in your info-sharing. Don’t distort facts or make exaggerated claims, as this will damage your integrity. Clearly cite sources and provide proof to back up your statements. This shows responsibility and builds credibility. Disclose any affiliations or biases that could affect the speech content, so the audience can make their own decisions. Respect confidentiality when needed. Keep sensitive info secret and don’t share it without permission.

Live with integrity and transparency when speaking publicly. This not only boosts your credibility but also helps you build relationships with the audience. Set expectations for integrity and transparency at the start of your speech. This will help create a trusting space and encourage participation. By following ethical principles, you show others how to do the same and promote a culture of honesty in public speaking. Let’s make use of these values today, for a better tomorrow!

Avoiding plagiarism – Public Speaking Ethics

To dodge plagiarism, here are some important guidelines to follow:

Principle – Description
Cite Sources – Give proper credit for info taken from outside.
Paraphrase – Express your thoughts in your own words.
Use Quotations – Put quotation marks when quoting directly.
Reference Page – Include a list of all sources used.

Even if you switch a few words, it still counts as plagiarism.

Plagiarism has been a problem in public speaking for many years. Famous figures like MLK Jr. and Joe Biden have been accused of plagiarism. To keep credibility, public speakers must be original and use ethical practices.

Also Read: Techniques for Innovative Thinking: Boost Creative Thinking

Ethical Challenges in Public Speaking

To navigate ethical challenges in public speaking, employ principles of responsible communication. Balancing persuasion and manipulation, handling sensitive topics, and ensuring diversity and inclusivity in speech content are key sub-sections explored here.

Balancing persuasion and manipulation

Public speaking is a balance between persuasion and manipulation . We can influence others, but we must be careful not to use manipulative tactics. Engage your audience honestly and ethically, with compelling ideas – without resorting to deceptive techniques.

Seek to convince your listeners with logical arguments, supported by evidence. Use rhetoric and storytelling to captivate their attention. There is a fine line between persuasion and manipulation – manipulation involves deceitful tactics or exploiting vulnerabilities, while persuasion relies on honest communication.

Be mindful of your intentions and impact – strive for authenticity. Share accurate and reliable information to build trust with your audience; ensure that they make informed decisions, rather than being coerced or misled.

Choose persuasion over manipulation – let your words empower others, not deceive them!

Handling sensitive topics

Talking in public can be tricky , especially when it’s about delicate themes. You must be careful, respectful and professional when dealing with them. It’s a matter of finding the balance between expressing your opinion while keeping in mind the potential effect on the listeners.

For delicate topics, empathy and understanding are essential. Acknowledge the different views to create an open and welcoming setting. Doing thorough research is also important to have a full grasp of the subject.

Moreover, the language you use is vital. Utilize respectful and inclusive terms to communicate effectively without causing any harm.

Moreover, being aware of your own prejudices and trying to be impartial while speaking is necessary. That way, you can share info without injecting your personal opinions.

As Maya Angelou said: “ Words have more power than what’s written on paper “. So, be mindful of the words you use when talking about sensitive matters publicly.

Ensuring diversity and inclusivity in speech content

Ensuring diverse and inclusive speech content is essential for public speaking. It involves considering different perspectives and engaging with a wide variety of people. Doing this creates a more relatable and meaningful message.

Importance of Diversity:

Reflects the real world.
Encourages empathy and understanding.
Breaks down barriers and encourages inclusivity.

Embracing diversity means recognizing varied cultures, backgrounds, and experiences. It enables speakers to connect deeper with their audience, creating a sense of belonging and appreciation. Considering diverse points of view helps to confront prejudices and stereotypes, enabling a healthier flow of ideas.

To make sure speech content is inclusive, one must strive for representation across different aspects such as gender, race, ethnicity, age, ability, and sexual orientation. This goes beyond tokenism – it requires genuine efforts to understand different perspectives and amplify diverse voices.

Let us keep in mind that embracing diversity in speech content is not only a moral obligation but also a potent force for social change. By creating an atmosphere that values everyone’s contributions equally, we can inspire beneficial changes within ourselves and society.

So let’s include diversity in our speeches today!

Also Read: Impact of Physical Fitness: Boost Self-Improvement

Case Studies: Examples of Ethical and Unethical Public Speaking

To better understand ethical and unethical public speaking, dive into case studies that showcase real-life examples. Explore ethical examples and unethical examples, highlighting the principles of responsible communication.

Ethical examples

Public speaking can either inspire or deceive. Ethically, it must be accurate and honest. Here are examples of ethical public speaking:

A balanced approach – presenting both sides of an argument.
Respecting diversity – accepting and valuing different cultures.
Emphasis on consent – always seek permission before using personal stories.
Engagement with the audience – active listening, interaction and participation.

Truthfulness is key in ethical public speaking. Present facts without bias to build trust. John Dawson’s TED Talk is a great example. He used complex scientific data in a way that was understandable for all. He communicated the urgency of climate change ethically and accurately.

Unethical examples

Public speaking is a tool to motivate, inform, and convince an audience. But, there are times when it goes against ethics. Here are some:

Plagiarism: Giving a presentation with other people’s words or ideas without giving due credit is wrong.
Misrepresentation: Giving false info or distorting facts to manipulate the audience is unethical.
Exploitation: Using emotionally charged stories or personal tragedies to get sympathy or support is wrong.
Hate speech: Discriminating, prejudicing, or hating individuals or groups based on race, gender, religion, or any other characteristic is not okay.
Conflict of interest: Not disclosing financial or personal interests that may influence the message undermines trustworthiness.

Note: These are just a few examples. There might be others.

As public speakers, it’s important to make sure our talks are engaging and ethical. By respecting others’ property rights, giving honest info, avoiding exploitation, promoting inclusivity, and revealing conflicts of interest, we can keep our speeches effective.

Pro Tip: An essential part of ethical speaking is being transparent with your audience. Honesty and truthfulness build trust and credibility.

Also Read: Setting SMART Goals for Personal Growth: A Step-by-Step Guide

Strategies for Responsible Communication

To effectively practice responsible communication, you need strategies that address key aspects of public speaking ethics. In “Strategies for Responsible Communication,” we’ll explore techniques that focus on preparing and researching thoroughly, being mindful of the impact of words and language, as well as engaging in active listening and responding to audience feedback. These approaches will help you become a more ethical and responsible communicator.

Preparing and researching thoroughly

Research your topic extensively for a deep understanding. This will ensure you give accurate and relevant information.
Organize your thoughts before communicating. This helps give structure and coherence.
Double-check facts and figures to maintain credibility. Accurate data adds reliability to your communication.
For best results, go beyond surface-level details. Look into lesser-known aspects to offer a new viewpoint.

Pro Tip: Use scholarly articles or peer-reviewed publications for reliable info.

Being mindful of the impact of words and language

The power of language can’t be overlooked. Each word we say or type carries the strength to form thoughts, opinions, and even encourage action. We must understand this power and take responsibility for our messages.

To truly grasp the effects of our words, we must consider many factors, such as cultural awareness, emotional responses, and the authority involved in any situation.

Also, when speaking, it’s essential to use language that is open-minded and not prejudicial. This helps make an environment where everyone feels appreciated and accepted. To do this, avoid judgemental terms, stereotypes, or generalizations.

Moreover, it’s important to bear in mind the context in which we communicate. The same message may have different impacts based on if it’s spoken in person, written in an email, or posted on social media. We can make sure our ideas are accurately represented by adjusting our words to the medium.

Furthermore, active listening is a central part of responsible communication. Taking the time to understand someone else’s perspective allows for efficient dialogue and engagement. This shows respect for their views and encourages mutual understanding.

To further improve responsible communication , here are a few tips:

Show empathy by thinking about how others feel before expressing your views or making judgments. Doing this allows us to connect with people on a deeper level and encourages open-mindedness.
Ask questions when conversations are unclear or confusing. Not only does this ensure understanding, but it also demonstrates a real interest in what others have to say.

Lastly, always strive for clarity in your own communication. Being straightforward and specific helps avoid misunderstandings and keeps the conversation on track.

By taking into account the impact of our words, selecting inclusive language, adapting to different contexts, actively listening, practicing empathy, seeking clarifications, and striving for clarity, we can create a responsible communication culture where ideas are exchanged and understood with respect.

Engaging in active listening and responding to audience feedback

Active listening involves more than just hearing words. It’s about taking in the non-verbal cues like facial expressions and body language too. This is important as it provides us with invaluable insights into how our audience really feels about our efforts.

An example of this in action is from 2019. A well-known company faced negative feedback about a product launch. Instead of ignoring it, they actively listened. They considered the concerns raised and acted to fix it. By admitting mistakes and finding solutions based on customer feedback, they regained trust, improved customer satisfaction, and even increased sales!

This proves that active listening and responding to audience feedback is key. It can create an open communication culture, strengthen relationships, and help our message resonate. Remember, effective communication is a two-way street! Valuing and responding to feedback ensures success.

Also Read: Top 100 Commonly Used A to Z Phrasal Verbs for English Fluency

To conclude, reinforce the ethical principles in public speaking and emphasize the importance of practicing responsible communication. Recap the ethical principles covered in previous sections and discuss the significance of adopting these principles in our speech. Highlight the value of responsible communication for building trust and fostering positive relationships.

Recap of ethical principles in public speaking

Public speaking requires sticking to ethical principles . Let’s review these key principles:

Honesty: Be honest to the audience. Don’t exaggerate or lie. This builds trust and reliability.
Respect: Respect different opinions. No language or behavior which offends or leaves people out.
Integrity: Be consistent and genuine in what you say and do. Match values and words to gain trust.

Plus, confidentiality, fairness, and responsibility should be kept in mind while speaking publicly.

An example illustrating the importance of ethical principles ? At a conference, the speaker was impressive. But in the Q&A session, he evaded questions and even made false claims. This unethical behavior made people feel deceived. It was a lesson on the importance of ethical standards in public speaking.

Ethical principles make it easier for speakers and audiences to connect. They show respect, trust, and integrity. Remembering these principles helps our message reach each listener in a genuine way.

Importance of practicing responsible communication.

In today’s fast-paced world, responsible communication is essential. It helps us make sure our messages are understood. Plus, it builds trust and maintains healthy relationships.

Responsible communication avoids misinterpretations and conflicts. We can pick our words carefully and think of the impact they have. This way, we show respect and create a positive atmosphere for discussion.

Responsible communication also boosts our credibility and professionalism. We can express ourselves clearly and concisely, so it’s easier for others to understand.

It’s also great for navigating sensitive subjects. We can express criticism without causing offense or harm. This encourages dialogue, rather than shutting it down.

Remember: Responsible communication is a two-way street. Listening is just as important as speaking. Show others the same respect and attention you expect from them. Know More – The Fluent Life

Frequently Asked Questions

1. What are public speaking ethics? A. Public speaking ethics refer to the principles and guidelines that govern responsible communication during public speaking engagements. They outline the ethical obligations and responsibilities speakers have towards their audience, content, and the impact their words may have on individuals or society.

2. Why are public speaking ethics important? A. Public speaking ethics are important because they ensure that speakers communicate responsibly, truthfully, and with integrity. They help maintain credibility, foster trust between the speaker and the audience, and promote respectful and ethical discourse in public spaces.

3. What are some key principles of responsible communication in public speaking? A. Some key principles of responsible communication in public speaking include honesty, accuracy, respect for diverse perspectives, avoiding harm, maintaining confidentiality when required, citing sources properly, and being mindful of the potential impact of words on others.

4. How can a speaker avoid unethical behavior during a public speaking engagement? A. A speaker can avoid unethical behavior during a public speaking engagement by conducting thorough research, fact-checking information before presenting it, avoiding plagiarism, using inclusive language, respecting the audience’s privacy and boundaries, and being open to feedback and constructive criticism.

5. Can public speaking ethics restrict freedom of speech? A. No, public speaking ethics do not restrict freedom of speech. They aim to promote responsible and ethical communication without infringing on individuals’ rights to express their opinions. Public speaking ethics provide guidelines to ensure that speeches are delivered in a manner that respects the dignity and rights of others.

6. What can the audience do if they suspect a speaker is engaging in unethical behavior? A. If an audience member suspects a speaker is engaging in unethical behavior, they can actively listen, critically analyze the speech, and if appropriate, ask for clarifications or challenge the speaker’s statements during Q&A sessions. Additionally, they can report their concerns to event organizers or relevant authorities, where necessary.

Public Speaking for Social Impact: A Strong Tool

Public Speaking in Digital Age through Webinars and Online Conferences

Public Speaking in Digital Age: Webinars and Online Conferences

Building Confidence in Public Speaking as a Public Speaker

Building Confidence in Public Speaking: Be Successful Speaker

File(s) under embargo

until file(s) become available

You Sound Like a Wif: The Representation of Women's Speech in Old English Literature

Date created, date modified, defense date, research director(s), committee members.

Doctor of Philosophy

Degree Level

Doctoral Dissertation

Temporal Coverage

Library record, oclc number, program name.

Medieval Studies

Spatial Coverage

Usage metrics.

Ethics in Public Speaking

Defining ethics.

But I want to say one thing to the American people. I want you to listen to me. I’m going to say this again: I did not have sexual relations with that woman , Miss Lewinsky. I never told anybody to lie, not a single time; never. These allegations are false. And I need to go back to work for the American people. Thank you. – President Bill Clinton, 1998

Some of the early leaders in philosophy—Aristotle, Socrates, and Plato—spoke extensively about morality and ethical principles. Aristotle is frequently cited as a central figure in the development of ethics as we discuss them today in the communication discipline. Aristotle claimed that a person who had ethos, or credibility, was not only able to convey good sense and good will, but also good morals. Great philosophers have debated the merits of living well, doing good, and even communicating skillfully. Smitter describes early Greeks and Romans as teachers of public speaking; these philosophers argued that public communication is “a means of civic engagement” and ethics are “a matter of virtue.” Ethics and ethical communication are not only an important part of our lives and our decision-making but also are crucial to the public speaking process. In 2011, when Representative Anthony Weiner faced accusations of sending sexually explicit photographs to a woman, he vehemently denied any wrongdoing and claimed that he had been set up. Shortly after, his denial turned to an admission and apology. This scandal called into question the ethics of Rep. Weiner, yet it was also his lack of ethical communication that exacerbated the situation.

Moral excellence comes about as a result of habit. We become just by doing just acts, temperate by doing temperate acts, brave by doing brave acts. – Aristotle

Ethics and Ethical Standards

Morality is the process of discerning between right and wrong. Ethics involves making decisions about right and wrong within a dilemma. For example, you might claim that stealing is morally wrong. But is stealing morally wrong when a mother steals a loaf of bread to feed her four starving children? It’s this scenario that requires an understanding of ethics. In a moral dilemma, we apply ethics to make choices about what is good or bad, right or wrong. Sometimes, ethical dilemmas are simple. Other times, they require complex choices, such as the decision to report your immediate boss for misrepresenting expenses or the decision to move your grandmother into a retirement community. These scenarios are more complex than simple choices between right and wrong. Instead, these examples are ethical dilemmas because two “right” choices are pitted against one another. It’s good to report an unethical supervisor, but it’s also good to keep your job. It’s good that your grandmother feels independent, but it’s also positive for her to receive extra assistance as her health deteriorates.

As public speakers, we make ethical choices when preparing and delivering a speech. We can easily be faced with a moral dilemma over what information to provide or how to accurately represent that information. Knowing the speaking setting, the audience, and our knowledge of the topic, we are able to confront ethical dilemmas with a strong moral compass. This process is made easier by our ethical standards. Ethical standards, or moral principles, are the set of rules we abide by that make us “good” people and help us choose right from wrong. The virtuous standards to which we adhere influence our ethical understanding. For instance, followers of Buddha believe that communication should be careful—good communication should exhibit restraint, responsibility, and kindness. [1]

If you want others to be happy, practice compassion. If you want to be happy, practice compassion. – Dalai Lama

Golden Buddha statue in a Tibetan shrine

“Emerald Buddha” by WPPilot. CC-BY-SA .

This stance informs one’s ethical standards. In fact, Merrill (2009) explains that the holy Dalai Lama, the Buddhist spiritual leader, believes compassion is even more essential than truth. Therefore, it is justifiable to be untruthful when the deception is part of the process of caring for another. This example illustrates how one’s belief system influences his or her ethical standards. These ethical standards are the guidelines we use to interpret rightness and wrongness in life, in relationships, and in public speaking. Wallace claims that “ethical standards of communication should place emphasis upon the means used to secure the end, rather than upon achieving the end itself.” [2] This argument suggests that speakers must consider moral standards through every step of the speech process.

“Questions of right and wrong arise whenever people communicate.” [3] Once we have identified our ethical standards, we can apply these to make sure that we are communicating ethically. Ethical communication is an exchange of responsible and trustworthy messages determined by our moral principles. Ethical communication can be enacted in written, oral, and non-verbal communication. In public speaking, we use ethical standards to determine what and how to exchange messages with our audience. As you read further in this chapter, you will begin to understand the guidelines for how ethical communication should occur in the public speaking process.

Merrill, J. C. (2009). Tenzin Gyatso, the Dalai Lama: Universal compassion. In C. Christians & J. Merrill (Eds.), Ethical communication (pp. 11 – 17). Columbia, MO: University of Missouri Press. ↵
Wallace, K. (1955). An ethical basis of communication. Speech Teacher , 4 , 1–9. ↵
National Communication Association. (1999). NCA credo for ethical communication. Retrieved from http://www.natcom.org/uploadedFiles/About_NCA/Leadership_and_Governance/Public_Policy_Platform/PDF-PolicyPlatformNCA_Credo_for_Ethical_Communication.pdf ↵
Chapter 3 Defining Ethics. Authored by : Alyssa Millner and Rachel Price. Provided by : King College and University of Kentucky. Located at : http://publicspeakingproject.org/psvirtualtext.html . Project : Public Speaking Project. License : CC BY-NC-ND: Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives
Emerald Buddha. Authored by : WPPilot. Located at : https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Emerald_Buddha_Photo_D_Ramey_Logan.jpg . License : CC BY-SA: Attribution-ShareAlike

Macron outlines his vision for Europe to become an assertive global power as war in Ukraine rages on

PARIS — French President Emmanuel Macron warned Thursday that Europe could “die” if it fails to build its own robust defense as Russia’s war in Ukraine rages on, or if it fails to undertake major trade and economic reforms to compete with China and the U.S.

Macron urged Europeans to become more ambitious in a fast-changing world to face the challenges of war, fierce trade competition, energy scarcity, climate change and increasing authoritarianism.

In a nearly two-hour speech at Sorbonne University in Paris, Macron said that the continent is divided and “too slow and lacks ambition” at a time when the 27-member European Union needs to become a superpower, defend its own borders and speak with one voice if it wants to survive and thrive.

“Our Europe today is mortal,” Macron said. “It can die and that depends solely on our choices,” he added. He called on people to make those choices now because, “it’s today that Europe is between war and peace.”

Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, now in its third year, is an existential threat and Europe isn’t armed enough to defend itself when “confronted by a power like Russia that has no inhibitions, no limits,” Macron said.

‘Our ability to ensure our security is at stake,” Macron said. “Russia mustn’t be allowed to win.”

Europe now has the “good fortune” of having the Biden administration’s commitment to supporting Ukraine, Macron said. But, in a year of key elections around Europe, in the U.S. and elsewhere, support may fragment or disappear entirely, he added.

“Europe must become capable of defending its interests, with its allies by our side whenever they are willing, and alone if necessary,” Macron said.

Strong armies, a European rapid intervention program and force, tanks, a missile shield and other weapons, produced in Europe, will need the support of “a joint diplomatic force that will speak with one voice and build bridges with Africa and Latin America,” the French leader said.

“Only then will Europe show that it’s not a United States’ lap dog, and that it also knows how to talk to other regions of the world,” he said.

France has been a firm supporter of Ukraine in its fight against Russian aggression, and Macron has often clashed with other Western leaders as he has insisted that Europe must stand by the country at any cost. The French president alarmed European leaders by saying recently that sending Western troops into Ukraine to shore up its defenses shouldn’t be ruled out.

Referring to trade practices of China and the U.S., Macron said “the two world powers have decided not to respect the rules of global trade” by shoring up protections and subsides while Europe’s industry remains open and is stuck in overregulation.

“Let’s do the same, we are in competition,” Macron said.

“We must buy faster, we must produce more and we must buy more that is made in Europe. That is key,” Macron said.

Thursday’s speech came less than two months before a pivotal European Parliament election.

Macron, an avid advocate of a united and assertive Europe, also rallied support for his centrist Renaissance party before the June 6-9 vote as far-right parties lead the moderate coalitions in the polls. He called for safeguarding democratic values as the “authoritarian model” was becoming “more popular” across the continent.

The war in Ukraine and immigration are top priorities for European Union voters, according to polls. Far-right parties have gained support by criticizing Macron’s government policies on both issues. Macron acknowledged divisions on immigration policies, including on asylum and deportation rules for those who have arrived to Europe illegally.

He emphasized the need for an effective response and Europe-wide coordination for curbing illegal immigration, closer cooperation with immigrants’ countries of origin and a unified, relentless fight against human traffickers.

Macron criticized the idea of striking an agreement, as Britain as done, with countries in Africa and elsewhere to transfer immigrants there.

“This is a betrayal of our values that ultimately leads us to dependency on other counties,” Macron said.

The British government earlier this week approved a law allowing the deportation of some migrants who enter the country illegally to Rwanda.

Macron lost his majority in France’s most influential house of parliament, the National Assembly, after the 2022 election to the far-left coalition and the far-right National Rally party.

The social situation in France remains tense as Paris prepares to host the Olympic Games this summer, amid protests from teachers and police officers, and farmer demonstrations in recent weeks. The protests follow huge rallies last year against Macron’s ultimately successful proposal to increase the retirement age from 62 to 64.

Barbara Surk reported from Nice, France. Lorne Cook contributed to this report from Brussels.

‘Infiltrators’: Modi accused of anti-Muslim hate speech amid India election

The Indian PM turned to old anti-Muslim tropes in an election rally, potentially signalling a shift in his campaign strategy, say analysts.

New Delhi, India — Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi is facing accusations of spreading hatred against Muslims after controversial comments on Sunday wherein he equated the community to “infiltrators” and peddled anti-Muslim tropes in the middle of the country’s general elections.

Speaking at a crowded rally in the western state of Rajasthan, Modi said if the opposition led by the Congress party came to power, it would distribute the country’s wealth among “those who have more children”, in an apparent reference to Muslims, whom he had spoken about just before.

Keep reading

Jobless engineers, mbas: the hidden army of indian election ‘consultants’, india votes in phase 2 of mammoth election as modi raises campaign pitch, farm suicides, anger mount in indian villages that modi promised hope, focus on southern states as india votes in second phase of mammoth election.

“Should your hard-earned money be given to infiltrators?” he said to the cheering crowd, before alleging that the opposition would take away even mangalsutras — the auspicious necklace that a husband ties around his wife’s neck in Hindu weddings — if given a chance.

Local poll officials in Rajasthan confirmed to Al Jazeera that they had received at least two complaints against Modi, calling for his election campaign to be suspended and for his arrest.

Renu Poonia, a nodal officer of the Election Commission of India (ECI) in the state capital, Jaipur, revealed that the complaints were received from the Azad Adhikar Sena, a regional political party, and a local non-profit organisation. India’s election code bars parties and politicians from engaging in speeches and campaigns that aim to perpetuate religious or caste differences. But independent watchdogs and activists have long complained that election officials act too slowly, if at all, especially when cases involve powerful officials in the government.

Many leaders in Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and its allies in India’s Hindu-majoritarian right have long portrayed the country’s 200 million Muslims effectively as outsiders. Muslim asylum seekers and refugees from Bangladesh and Myanmar are in particular targeted as “infiltrators”.

The BJP and its partners have also long pushed a conspiracy theory that suggests that Indian Muslims produce more children intending to eventually outnumber Hindus in the country. In reality, government data shows that the Muslim fertility rate in India is dropping the fastest among all communities and has almost halved in the past three decades.

Modi has himself promoted this stereotype — in 2002, after an anti-Muslim massacre in the state of Gujarat, where he served terms as chief minister — infamously mocking relief camps as baby-producing factories.

Yet, in recent years, while others in his party and its coalition partners have often engaged in open Islamophobic commentary and even violence, Modi has focused on his government’s claimed accomplishments in the fields of the economy and social development. That had been the principal thrust of his 2024 re-election campaign too.

Asim Ali, a political commentator, said Modi’s remarks were “the most inflammatory statement by a sitting prime minister in the recent history of India” and marked a significant shift in his election pitch. India is poised to vote in the second of seven phases of its national election on Friday, April 26. The first phase of voting was held on April 19.

“Five years ago, the question was why is Modi not reigning in extremist voices; now, PM Modi is the most extremist campaigner,” said Ali.

‘Unconscious comment’ or ‘true nature’?

In his speech, Modi said he was referring to the Congress election manifesto, which promises wealth redistribution amid growing concerns over inequality, and to past statements by the opposition party.

“When they [the Congress] were in power, they said Muslims have first right over resources. They will gather all your wealth and distribute it among those who have more children,” Modi said.

In 2006, then-Prime Minister Manmohan Singh of the Congress had said India’s traditionally marginalised communities, including castes that had faced historical discrimination and religious minorities, “particularly Muslims”, should have the first claim on the nation’s resources. Singh’s comment had followed a report by a government-appointed panel under a former judge that had found that the social, economic and educational conditions of Indian Muslims were worse than those of any caste or community.

Modi’s comments, some analysts and common Muslims said, could instigate hate-fuelled violence against Muslims — already a problem that has skyrocketed under the current government’s decade-long reign.

“The PM might have said it as a jibe against the Congress, but eventually this will further perpetuate the stereotype of Muslims as a problem, and not an asset for India,” said Zeyad Masroor Khan, journalist and author of City on Fire, a book on an anti-Muslim riot in Aligarh in the northern state of Uttar Pradesh. The comments might “even promote acts of violence against Muslims”, he said.

Khan said the shift in campaign messaging “exposes the true nature of Modi”.

Sandeep Shastri, the national coordinator of the New Delhi-based Centre for the Study of Developing Societies (CSDS) research programme Lokniti Network, said he hoped Modi’s comments were a slip — and not a conscious change in campaign strategy. According to CSDS polling, the BJP holds a comfortable 12 percent vote advantage over the principal opposition alliance.

“I do not think that the ground situation warranted any rashness from Modi,” said Shastri, adding that he was personally “disappointed” by the statement. “It could have been an unconscious comment – made in the rush of the moment or excitement of campaign,” Shastri added, referring to Modi’s assertion, after he won the 2019 election, that he would work for all Indians. Against that backdrop, comments like Sunday’s “are best avoided”, he said.

“If the intention is what the speech suggests, it is a matter of huge alarm.”

‘Scared to go to the market’

Ashfaq Hussain, a 35-year-old contractor in Rajasthan, is not waiting for any clarification from Modi or the BJP about Sunday’s comments. He said he has seen enough.

Hussain was sitting with his teenage son when a snippet of Modi’s speech popped up on his smartphone. He scrolled the feed quickly, he said. “Our PM is using language like ‘infiltrators’ for us. I feel ashamed and it is gutting,” he told Al Jazeera.

Rajasthan has witnessed a series of anti-Muslim hate crimes in recent years, including lynchings.

“[Modi’s speech] endangers my family’s safety and further divides our society by erasing the historical brotherhood.”

“I’m scared to even go to the market alone in the evening; people call names and try to instigate, which then can anytime turn into a lynching,” Hussain said.

BJP national spokesperson Zafar Islam said Modi’s comments were being misinterpreted.

“We need to get this in right context. In the past, a lot of people have come from outside and have now mixed in the society and using resources,” he said, suggesting that Modi was referring to foreign nationals illegal in India, and not Indian Muslims, while speaking of “infiltrators”.

Islam claimed that Indian Muslims had benefited from government schemes under Modi and that opposition parties relied on scaremongering to get religious minorities to vote for them.

But the Congress party chief, Mallikarjun Kharge, said Modi’s “hate speech” was “a deliberate ploy to divert attention”.

Ali, the political commentator, agreed. The opposition has been focusing on the need for a caste census — an enumeration of the populations of different castes in India. The Congress claims this would show how disadvantaged castes have been denied adequate affirmative action. “To respond to the opposition, textbook politics say you need a scapegoat; and for the BJP, it has been Muslims,” he said.

The speech was also worrying, Ali said, because of Modi’s attempt to portray Muslims as dangerous to the very identity of Hindus.

“Mangalsutras are considered sacred – it was a deeply psychological attack that gives a sense that Muslims will endanger your private, domestic space,” said Ali.

“This is a very dangerous moment for Indian politics.”

'Europe could die': Macron urges stronger defences, economic reforms

Medium Text
Macron in landmark speech stresses need for strong defences
Says Europe must support firms in AI, green energy
Hopes to repeat success of 2017 Sorbonne speech
Speech comes against troubled global backdrop
Macron keen to energise his base ahead of EU election

French President Emmanuel Macron holds speech on Europe's future at la Sorbonne

ECONOMIC CHALLENGES

Additional reporting by Dominique Vidalon, Benoit Van Overstraeten, Gabriel Stargardter, Writing by Michel Rose and Ingrid Melander, Editing by Gareth Jones and Angus MacSwan

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles. New Tab , opens new tab

Britain's Royals attend the Easter Matins Service at St. George's Chapel, Windsor Castle

World Chevron

Four expatriate workers were killed in a drone attack targeting the Khor Mor gas field in Iraq's Kurdistan region on Friday, an advisor to the Iraqi Kurdish prime minister told Reuters.

People take shelter inside a metro station during a Russian missile strike in Kyiv

Kiribati has notified an Australian-born judge removed from High Court by parliament this week that he will be deported after 21 days, in a case a U.N. special rapporteur said was a major setback for justice in the Pacific Islands nation.

Illustration shows Chinese and Taiwanese flags

IMAGES

Ethics Essay
Speech on ethics and etiquette in english
Sample essay on ethics
Sentences with Ethics, Ethics in a Sentence in English, Sentences For
Write an essay on Ethics and Etiquette
😊 Speech on business ethics. KEYNOTE ETHICS SPEECH FROM DR. BRUCE

VIDEO

Ethics in Public Speaking
What Is Ethic In English
Applied Ethics [English]
Elon Musk Speaks Out: The Power and Challenges of Freedom of Speech! 💬🗣️ #elonmusk #shorts
Direct / Indirectb speech شرح درس لجميع المستويات والبكالوريا bac 2024 باك with amine english
Meaning Of Ethics

COMMENTS

Ethics and Public Speaking
Distinguishing Between Ethical and Unethical Speeches. Based on the exploration of ethics, perspectives on ethics, and the NCA Credo for ethical communication, it is appropriate to observe that irrespective of cultural background or values, some general principles should guide what is ethical or unethical in public speaking. Purpose of the Speech
2.2 Ethics in Public Speaking
The study of ethics in human communication is hardly a recent endeavor. One of the earliest discussions of ethics in communication (and particularly in public speaking) was conducted by the ancient Greek philosopher Plato in his dialogue Phaedrus.In the centuries since Plato's time, an entire subfield within the discipline of human communication has developed to explain and understand ...
Ethics in Public Speaking
The two major aspects of ethics in terms of public speaking are credibility and plagiarism. We define these issues and present strategies for increasing your credibility and preventing plagiarism, thus allowing you to deliver ethical and effective speeches. In the fourth century BCE, the classic philosopher Aristotle took up the study of the ...
Stand up, Speak out: The Practice and Ethics of Public Speaking
Stand up, Speak out: The Practice and Ethics of Public Speaking features two key themes. First it focuses on helping students become more seasoned and polished public speakers, and second is its emphasis on ethics in communication. It is this practical approach and integrated ethical coverage that setsStand up, Speak out: The Practice and Ethics of Public Speakingapart from the other texts in ...
5.2 Ethics in Public Speaking
5.2 Ethics in Public Speaking. The study of ethics in human communication is hardly a recent endeavor. One of the earliest discussions of ethics in communication (and particularly in public speaking) was conducted by the ancient Greek philosopher Plato in his dialogue Phaedrus.In the centuries since Plato's time, an entire subfield within the discipline of human communication has developed ...
Chapter 2: Ethics
2. Chapter 2: Ethics. Lauren Rome, College of the Canyons. Adapted by William Kelvin, Professor of Communication Studies, Florida SouthWestern State College. LEARNING OBJECTIVES. After reading this chapter, you should be able to: define ethics. explain the importance of ethics in public speaking. explain the ethical responsibilities of a speaker.
Ethics and Public Speaking
Anthony Naaeke, Ph.D. and Eva Kolbusz-Kijne, Ph.D. Discuss the meaning of ethics. Distinguish between absolute and relativist perspectives on ethics. Identify and apply the code of ethics for ethical public speaking established by the National Communication Association. Distinguish between ethical and unethical speech.
Chapter 2: Ethics Matters: Understanding the Ethics of Public Speaking
To help you understand the issues involved with thinking about ethics, this chapter begins by presenting a model for ethical communication known as the ethics pyramid. We will then show how the National Communication Association (NCA) Credo for Ethical Communication can be applied to public speaking. The chapter will conclude with a general ...
5.3: Ethics in Public Speaking
5.3: Ethics in Public Speaking. Page ID. The study of ethics in human communication is hardly a recent endeavor. One of the earliest discussions of ethics in communication (and particularly in public speaking) was conducted by the ancient Greek philosopher Plato in his dialogue Phaedrus. In the centuries since Plato's time, an entire subfield ...
Ethics in Public Speaking
To provide honest facts with integrity and without deception or distortion. To abide by shared or common moral values and beliefs. The study of ethics is incredibly important to any student of public speaking, as the most effective public speakers are those who practice ethical behavior in their speeches. In 1999, the National Communication ...
Putting It Together: Ethical Speech
Here are some of the key concepts we discussed: Ethics are a set of standards that govern the conduct of a person. Ethical behavior should not be confused with moral or legal behavior. Within any public speaking scenario, ethical speech is of paramount importance. Unconscious or implicit bias can interfere with fair and ethical communication.
Ethical Speaking
Ethical public speaking is not a one-time event. It does not just occur when you stand to give a 5-minute presentation to your classmates or co-workers. Ethical public speaking is a process. This process begins when you begin brainstorming the topic of your speech. Every time you plan to speak to an audience—whether it is at a formal speaking ...
3: Ethics in Public Speaking
This chapter explores ethics and ethical communication in public speaking. First, ethics and ethical standards are defined. Second, this chapter describes principles of ethical public speaking, with guidelines for avoiding plagiarism, citing sources, and setting responsible speech goals. Lastly, your responsibilities as an ethical listener of ...
Chapter 4: Ethics
Describe free speech as outlined in the First Amendment to the US Constitution and how free speech relates to other guaranteed freedoms. Discuss patterns of media ownership, the relationship of media and globalization, and the effects of diversity (or lack thereof) or media representations. Employ media-literacy skills to evaluate media messages.
Chapter 3: Ethics in Public Speaking
3.1 - Ethical Stances on Public Speaking. A public speaker, whether delivering a speech in a classroom, board room, civic meeting, or in any other venue, must uphold certain ethical standards. These standards will allow the audience to make informed choices, to view the speaker as a credible source of information, and to avoid repercussions ...
Ethics in Public Speaking
What is ethical speech, and why is ethics important in public speaking? ... English, science, history, and more. Plus, get practice tests, quizzes, and personalized coaching to help you succeed. ...
Ethics Matters: Understanding the Ethics of Public Speaking
Ends. The final part of the ethics pyramid is the ends. According to McCroskey, Wrench, and Richmond, McCroskey, J. C., Wrench, J. S., & Richmond, V. P. (2003). Principles of public speaking.Indianapolis, IN: The College Network. ends The outcomes that one desires to achieve. are those outcomes that you desire to achieve. Examples of ends might include persuading your audience to make a ...
PRDV217: Ethics in Public Speaking
The study of ethics in human communication is hardly a recent endeavor. One of the earliest discussions of ethics in communication (and particularly in public speaking) was conducted by the ancient Greek philosopher Plato in his dialogue Phaedrus. In the centuries since Plato's time, an entire subfield within the discipline of human ...
3 Chapter 3: Ethics in Public Speaking
Chapter 3 Learning objectives. After reading this chapter, the student will be able to: Explain the legal, cultural, philosophical, and social origins of ethics in public speaking. Explain the difference between plagiarism and correct appropriation of source materials. Understand the value of ethics in building a solid reputation as a speaker.
Public Speaking Ethics: Principles of Responsible Communication
5. Can public speaking ethics restrict freedom of speech? A. No, public speaking ethics do not restrict freedom of speech. They aim to promote responsible and ethical communication without infringing on individuals' rights to express their opinions. Public speaking ethics provide guidelines to ensure that speeches are delivered in a manner ...
You Sound Like a Wif: The Representation of Women's Speech in Old
This dissertation examines the representation of women's speech in Pre-Conquest vernacular literature to determine whether early English authors saw speech and gender as inherently connected, either through physical embodiment or performative traits. More specifically, it asks, given the limited extant sources, contemporary perspectives of gender, language, written culture, and current ...
Defining Ethics
Ethical communication is an exchange of responsible and trustworthy messages determined by our moral principles. Ethical communication can be enacted in written, oral, and non-verbal communication. In public speaking, we use ethical standards to determine what and how to exchange messages with our audience. As you read further in this chapter ...
Macron outlines his vision for Europe to become an assertive global
In a nearly two-hour speech at Sorbonne University in Paris, Macron said that the continent is divided and "too slow and lacks ambition" at a time when the 27-member European Union needs to ...
4.2 Ethics in Public Speaking
4.2 Ethics in Public Speaking. The study of ethics in human communication is hardly a recent endeavor. One of the earliest discussions of ethics in communication (and particularly in public speaking) was conducted by the ancient Greek philosopher Plato in his dialogue Phaedrus. In the centuries since Plato's time, an entire subfield within ...
'Infiltrators': Modi accused of anti-Muslim hate speech amid India
In his speech, Modi said he was referring to the Congress election manifesto, which promises wealth redistribution amid growing concerns over inequality, and to past statements by the opposition ...
'Europe could die': Macron urges stronger defences, economic reforms
The speech won a positive response from Macron's main EU partner, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz, with whom he has often clashed on defence and trade issues. "France and Germany want Europe to be ...