Chapter III: Rhetorical Tradition

Burke’s Dramatism

Kenneth Burke developed dramatism as a method of analyzing language and human motivation
through a dramatistic perspective.

“Life is not like a drama; life is drama. “

Burke regarded persuasion as the communicator’s attempt to get the audience to accept his or
her view of reality as true. The dramatistic pentad is a tool to analyze how the speaker tries to do
it. The five-pronged method is a shorthand way to “talk about their talk about.” Burke’s pentad
directs the critic’s attention to five crucial elements of the human drama—act, scene, agent,
agency, and purpose.

The dramatistic pentad is deceptively similar to the standard journalistic practice of answering
who, what, where, when, why, and how in the opening paragraph of a story. Because Burke
regarded himself as an interpreter rather than a reporter, he was not content merely to label the
five categories. By evaluating the ratio of importance between individual pairs (scene–agency,
agent– act), the critic can determine which element provides the best clue to the speaker’s
motivation.

The pentad offers a way to determine why the speaker selected a given rhetorical strategy to
identify with the audience. When a message stresses one element over the other four, it reveals
the speaker’s philosophy or worldview.

Act. A critic’s label for the act illustrates what was done. A speech that features dramatic verbs
demonstrates a commitment to realism.

Scene. The description of the scene gives a context for where and when the act was performed.
Public speaking that emphasizes setting and circum- stance, downplays free will, and reflects an
attitude of situational determinism. (“I had no choice.”)

Agent. The agent is the person or people who performed the act. Some messages are filled with
references to self, mind, spirit, and personal responsibil- ity. This focus on character and the agent
as instigator is consistent with philo- sophical idealism.

Agency. Agency is the means the agent used to do the deed. A long descrip- tion of methods or
technique reflects a “get-the-job-done” approach that springs from the speaker’s mindset of
pragmatism.

Purpose. The speaker’s purpose is the stated or implied goal of the address. An extended
discussion of purpose within the message shows a strong desire on the part of the speaker for
unity or ultimate meaning in life, which are com- mon concerns of mysticism.

Burke expanded classical rhetorical analysis by viewing communication through a dramatistic

lens, making him a significant 20th-century contributor to rhetorical theory. His work bridges
traditional rhetorical studies with broader communication and linguistic analysis.
Case Study using Burke's Dramatism: ABS-CBN Franchise Non-renewal (2020)
Using Burke's Dramatistic Pentad:

1. ACT (What happened?)

- Non-renewal of broadcasting franchise
- Network shutdown
- Mass employee layoffs
- Shift to digital platforms
- Public protests and debates

2. SCENE (Where/When did it happen?)

- During COVID-19 pandemic
- Political climate under Duterte administration
- Rising digital media landscape
- Economic uncertainty
- Media industry transformation period

3. AGENT (Who did it?)

- Congress
- Government regulatory bodies
- Network executives
- Media workers
- Public stakeholders
- Advocacy groups

4. AGENCY (How was it done?)

- Legislative process
- Regulatory actions
- Public hearings
- Media coverage
- Social media campaigns
- Public demonstrations

5. PURPOSE (Why?)
- Political motivations
- Regulatory compliance issues
- Press freedom implications
- Media industry transformation
- Power dynamics in media landscape

Research Applications:
- Analysis of power relations in media
- Study of crisis communication strategies
- Investigation of public discourse
- Examination of media transformation
- Documentation of organizational communication

This case demonstrates how Burke's Dramatism can analyze complex communication events by
examining multiple perspectives and motivations in social drama.
The dramatistic analysis reveals how language, symbolism, and collective communication were
crucial in constructing the revolution's meaning and motivating social transformation.

Communication Research Applications:

1. Media Analysis
- News framing studies
- Social media discourse analysis
- Political communication research
Example: Analyzing presidential debate performances through dramatistic lens

2. Crisis Communication Studies

- Corporate response strategies
- Public relations campaigns
- Reputation management
Example: Examining company responses to environmental controversies

3. Organizational Communication
- Internal communication analysis
- Change management messaging
- Leadership communication
Example: Studying merger/acquisition announcements

4. Cultural Communication
- Social movement rhetoric
- Protest communication
- Cultural narrative analysis
Example: Analyzing EDSA People Power Revolution narratives

Research Questions Examples:

- How do political leaders construct narratives?
- What motivates organizational communication choices?
- How do social movements frame their messages?
- What role does scene play in crisis communication?

This theoretical framework helps researchers understand how communication constructs

meaning and motivates action in various contexts.
Toulmin’s Theory of Message Production

Stephen Toulmin’s theory provides a model for analyzing argumentative discourse,

focusing on how arguments are constructed and evaluated. Toulmin’s effort to understand the
certainty of messages and the functions of rationality within them begins with a traditional
distinction between types of arguments. Toulmin calls arguments in which claims are grounded
in a particular context or situation substantive arguments; these require an inferential leap from
the particulars to the conclusion. Analytic arguments, on the other hand, are based on universal,
unchanging premises, and the conclusion follows naturally from the premises.

First, analytical argument does not take into account who is arguing; the formula for a
proper logical argument proceeds the same regardless of who makes the argument. For Toulmin,
however, the person matters a great deal in real-life messages. “Things which are learned,
employed, sometimes modified, on occasion even abandoned, by the people doing the reasoning”
are what count as rational. Furthermore, practical concerns rarely are governed by a single,
unchanging universal principle, which is the starting premise for analytic or formal arguments.
Contexts and concepts constantly shift and evolve in everyday affairs, making absolute
knowledge and certainty impossible.

Toulmin’s model of argument has six parts. The basic elements of any argument are the
first three elements—the grounds, warrant, and claim. The backing, modal qualifier, and rebuttal,
however, contextualize the arguments and show the process ofjustification as the arguer makes
a claim and finds the good reasons for it. The backing supports the warrant, offering reasons why
the move from the ground to the claim makes sense. The modal qualifier asserts the strength of
the arguer’s certainty—how strong is the relationship between the claim and the practical
arguments offered to back it up? Finally, the rebuttal admits that there may be factors that would
negate the claim being made—circumstances that could occur such that the warrant no longer
would support or justify the claim. Thus a com plete argument looks something like this:

(1) Many people are not covered by health insurance, (grounds)

(2) Universal coverage is necessary to reduce health costs, (warrant)
(3) as studies show, (backing)
(4) Therefore, most certainly (modal qualifier)
(5) a plan is needed to get everyone covered, (claim)
(6) unless doing so would increase the national debt, (rebuttal)

Key rhetorical elements include:

• Claim: The main argument
• Data: Evidence supporting the claim
• Warrant: Logical connection between claim and data
• Backing: Additional support for the warrant
• Qualifier: Limitations or conditions of the argument
• Rebuttal: Potential counterarguments

Toulmin’s model, with its mapping of the decisions an arguer makes along the way to justify
a claim, demonstrates how contextualized and specific to each case practical argument is. He
offers an approach for understanding and analyzing the process involved in the everyday process
of constructing messages based in infor mal reasoning. His model became popular in
communication classes for teaching argumentation, audience analysis, the process of persuasion
and attitude change, and even the social reasoning process in interpersonal interactions.

The model helps structure persuasive communication by providing a systematic way to present
and analyze arguments.

Example Case Study: Anti-Disinformation Campaign in Philippine Social Media

Title: "Facts First PH: Combating Online Misinformation"

Analysis:
1. CLAIM "Social media literacy education should be mandatory in Philippine schools to
combat disinformation."

2. DATA (Evidence)
• 76% of Filipinos get news from social media
• Studies show increased spread of fake news during elections
• Survey data indicates low digital literacy rates
• Documented cases of misinformation affecting public opinion

3. WARRANT (Connection) If social media is the primary news source and digital literacy is
low, then education is necessary to protect public discourse and democratic processes.

4. BACKING (Support)
• UNESCO studies on media literacy effectiveness
• Successful implementation in other countries
• Research showing correlation between education and misinformation resistance
• Expert testimonies from communication scholars

5. QUALIFIER (Limitations)
• Implementation must be age-appropriate
• Resources and teacher training needed
• Must be updated regularly for new platforms
• Effectiveness varies by demographic

6. REBUTTAL (Counter-arguments)
• Cost implications for schools
• Curriculum overcrowding concerns
• Potential political resistance
• Time constraints in academic schedule

Application in communication research:

1. Campaign Analysis Research

• Analyzing public health campaigns
• Examining political messaging strategies
• Evaluating social movement communications Example: Research on COVID-19
vaccination campaign messaging in Filipino communities

2. Content Analysis Studies

• Message framing in news media
• Social media communication patterns
• Corporate communication strategies Example: Analyzing crisis communication during
natural disasters in Philippine context

3. Audience Reception Studies

• Message interpretation research
• Impact assessment studies
• Effectiveness evaluation Example: How different age groups interpret climate change
messages

4. Message Design Research

• Testing message effectiveness
• Comparing communication approaches
• Analyzing cultural adaptations Example: Research on localizing global brand messages
for Filipino audiences

5. Cross-Platform Studies
• Multi-channel message consistency
• Platform-specific adaptations
• Integrated communication strategies Example: How government agencies adapt
messages across different media platforms
Elaboration Likelihood Theory

Elaboration Likelihood Model of Richard Petty & John Cacioppo is inherently rhetorical,
offering a systematic approach to understanding how arguments are formed, justified, and
challenged in communication.

Petty labeled the two cognitive processes the central route and the peripheral route. He
sees the distinction as helpful in reconciling much of the conflicting data of persuasion research.
The central route involves message elaboration. Elaboration is “the extent to which a person
carefully thinks about issue-relevant arguments contained in a persuasive communication.” In an
attempt to process new information rationally, people using the central route carefully scrutinize
the ideas, try to figure out if they have true merit, and mull over their implications.

The peripheral route offers a mental shortcut path to accepting or rejecting a message
“without any active thinking about the attributes of the issue or the object of consideration.” Instead
of doing extensive cognitive work, recipients rely on a variety of cues that allow them to make
quick decisions.

These cues allow us to fly the peripheral route on automatic pilot:

1. Reciprocation—“You owe me.”

2. Consistency—“We’ve always done it that way.”
3. Social proof—“Everybody’s doing it.”
4. Liking—“Love me, love my ideas.”
5. Authority—“Just because I say so.”
6. Scarcity—“Quick, before they’re all gone.”

Central to ELM is how people process persuasive messages through two routes:
1. Central Route: Thoughtful, in-depth message processing
2. Peripheral Route: Surface-level, heuristic processing

The elaboration scale at the top represents effortful scrutiny of arguments on the left-hand side
and mindless reliance on noncontent cues on the right. Most messages receive middle-ground
attention between these poles, but there’s always a trade-off.
 Figure 16–1 shows a simplified version of Petty and Cacioppo’s elaboration likelihood
model (ELM)

While not classical rhetoric, ELM intersects with rhetorical studies by examining:
- Persuasion mechanisms
- How arguments are processed
- Factors influencing attitude change
Example case study and research application of ELM:

Case Study: DOH Vaccination Campaign

1. Central Route Processing:

- Detailed Information
- Scientific data about vaccine efficacy
- Medical expert testimonials
- Statistical evidence of benefits
- Comprehensive health information

2. Peripheral Route Processing:

- Celebrity endorsements
- Emotional appeal videos, Simple, emotionally compelling posters
- Simple infographics
- Social media influencer content
- Social media campaigns with catchy slogans

The campaigns strategically use both routes to maximize message persuasiveness, adapting to
different audience engagement levels and cognitive processing capabilities.

Communication Research Applications:

1. Health Communication Research

- Vaccine hesitancy studies
- Public health message testing
- Health literacy assessment

Example Study:
- Comparing effectiveness of scientific vs. emotional appeals
- Measuring attitude change through different processing routes

2. Media Campaign Analysis

- Message design evaluation
- Audience engagement studies
- Platform effectiveness comparison
Methods:
- Pre/post surveys
- Focus groups
- Content analysis
- Engagement metrics

3. Audience Research
- Motivation assessment
- Processing route preference
- Message retention studies
Tools:
- Surveys
- Interviews
- Experimental designs
- Digital analytics

4. Message Design Research

- Testing message formats
- Comparing appeal types
- Analyzing engagement levels

This framework helps researchers understand how different audiences process persuasive
messages and design effective communication strategies.