In ancient times, to be considered a great thinker, one need only a stage, loud voice, and enough free time to ask oneself “why,” but in 2019, it’s a bit more complex. Those who would’ve once passed for philosophers have evolved, through technology, into a hybrid of both idea creator and idea distributer. We are now both the writers and the publishers; the speakers and the audience. You can identify this new breed of philosophers by their new monikers, “storytellers” or “content creators.” Although most people who disseminate knowledge in modern times are not the inceptors of the ideas they peddle, they nonetheless must understand the reasons behind why an audience would listen to what they have to say.
Take into consideration, the humble Joe Rogan. A pillar of the podcasting industry. The first and last name on many people’s lips when starting a new show. Now ask yourself, what exactly is his brand? What is he selling you? What is so hypnotizing about his show that its garnered the following that it has? It certainly isn’t anything he went to school for.
Furthermore, why exactly do we put our trust in anything at all? This can be expanded to sources like the nightly news or your Instagram feed. Why is it that when the graphics packages roll every evening at 6pm, the words of the faces on our televisions carry so much weight? Even those for whom there is nothing more aggravating than someone on TV telling them what is fact and what is fiction, they can scarcely take their eyes away from the image. Why do we all crave the meaningful lives of the people who broadcast their every move on social media? Is it how much we care about the subject matter at hand? Is it the logistics of the contents; presented in such a way that we cannot help but deny their thesis’s? Or is Shakespeare to be dammed and the only reason we care about anything is simply the names slapped onto the mediums? In a word, yes. Fill in bubble D: All of the above.
When presented in the correct way, there is something hypnotic about a good story. Like a Siren song, we cannot help but take the information in. This phenomenon was pondered by one of those aforementioned ancients with the free time to ask “why?” Aristotle was a Greek philosopher, thinker, and proto-scientist who lived in Athens between 384 and 322 BC. He sought to outline a simple formula for understanding how to break apart an argument. He wanted to know exactly why humans were convinced of the things we believed. He wanted to know why some arguments seem to fall flat, while others some were willing to die for. He was an analytical content creator of his time.
Thus enters the Rhetorical Triangle. It is a simple method for breaking apart the ideas that the world tries to sell you. As a producer of content, it would then serve you well to reverse-engineer this formula as to discover exactly what a compelling piece of content is made of.
The Triangle has three parts, most of which get thrown around a lot in day-to-day conversation and are rarely used together (save for 11th grade AP English classes). The parts are Ethos, Pathos, and Logos. When put together properly and in sufficient prose, they create something a consumer cannot help but take to heart. When studied, they serve as a lens to better quantify and evaluate rhetoric or stories. The clarity of which is almost like magic and will allow you to craft a narrative nearly immune to critique and unable to be ignored.
Let’s begin with Logos, or the logic of an argument and how it applies to modern content creation. To Aristotle, this was the most important part of the argument. In modern times, this can sometimes be overlooked. We hear the ripples of its ignorance every time the phrase “facts don’t care about your feelings” gets uttered haphazardly in an online debate. Logos makes up the subconscious bulk of every argument. When watching a YouTube tutorial, it’s the actual words and directions being spoken. When reading a self-help book, it is the lessons being taught. When recording a podcast, it is the things you’ve researched or the things you or your guest have to say. There are certain unspoken rules when it comes to presenting logic. Namely that everyone is operating from an objective standpoint. For example, if I say that Gucci Mane’s last album was trash, this is not adhering to the rules of Logos as I have not followed any pieces of information to their next logical steps. However, if I was to compare Gucci Mane’s latest album to his previous bodies of work, comparing the complexity of the lyrics and the depth of the stories he tried to convey, then I would be operating closer to Logos. Using Joe Rogan as an example, Logos is when he asks his guest a very pointed question to which the response is usually a story with a tangible lesson, experimental finding, or an interpretation of research. Simply put, anything derived using the scientific method would fall under the umbrella of Logos. For you, the budding podcaster, the lesson here is scripting. You do not need to write a dissertation before you turn the microphone on, but you do need to be aware of the information you are conveying to your audience. You need to be aware of when you are speaking from a place of objectivity and a place of subjectivity and you need to know how those discussions fit into the larger context of your show. You can do this by bulleting your conversation topics and doing diligent research before the show starts. In this way, if a listener does not know who you are and does not have an emotional connection to what you’re saying, perhaps you can still capture their ear by speaking of things they cannot logically deny.
Let’s continue this train of thought. Say for example your favorite podcaster was in the middle of a discussion about something inconsequential like a stain on their favorite jeans; and not only that, they aren’t acknowledging what the stain consists of or how they discovered it. You’d still likely stay tuned in with the unspoken understanding that this conversation is leading somewhere entertaining. Firstly, this would be a failure of Logos on the part of the podcaster in the sense that they have not discussed the details that solidify the topic to objective reality. They are operating purely anecdotally. However, secondly, the reason this lack of detail keeps one hypothetically hooked is one’s faith in this host as a storyteller. This unspoken credibility is called Ethos. Ethos is the blatant or subconscious authority with which a person speaks. It is the reason we inherently believe the nightly news. It is the reason doctors hang their degrees on their office walls. One really does not notice Ethos until it is not present and even then you only notice in the form of muttering something like “this dude is full of shit.” To determine Ethos, ask yourself a simple question, “why should I trust this?” The source in question can be yourself, or your guest, but it can also be extended to bigger ideas like entire brands. Why does it sting so much to discover your Gucci purse is a knockoff? You still had an emotional connection to it, it still looks and functions exactly the same, but the credibility is not there. The unspoken contract between you and the information or product you’re receiving has been broken. In this case, any quality, story, research, or identity you associate with this brand, has been a deception. The Ethos is no longer there for you. To again use Joe Rogan as an example, the fascinating thing about his show is his notable lack of Ethos. To use a cliche, he is the exception that proves the rule. As I mentioned before, he does not have a degree in the sciences, however nearly all of his guests do and it makes for severely compelling content. That is because the show itself still has Ethos. In situations like this, the Ethos is borrowed from the weight of his guests’ knowledge and background. A podcast that has booked a professor will never fail to mention the professor’s level of education because that is where their Ethos is derived from. The lesson here is: as a new podcaster, you do not need a medical degree or tenure to have Ethos. You can derive your Ethos from wherever your position in society is, as long as you are honest about it and your experiences within it. Let’s say you work the nightly custodian shift at a gym; you would probably assume you have less Ethos than say a constitutional lawyer. However, if the context of a conversation is the proper method for cleaning exercise equipment or which cleaning solutions can be toxic when applied in incorrect places, I would trust your authority over the lawyer’s. Everybody has Ethos. You simply need to have an honest introspective moment with yourself to figure out what in your history gives you the authority to speak and on which subjects it allows you to speak credibly on. As long as you understand your wheelhouse, and don’t try to speak on things outside of it without proper Logos or borrowed-Ethos, not only will people inherently trust what you have to say, you will have genuinely given them no reason not to. Strictly speaking from a credibility standpoint that is. Don’t use this authority to deceive your listener. This is widely considered unethical and a “dick-move” in the podcasting space.
Lastly, I want to return to a phrase I mentioned earlier, “facts don’t care about your feelings.” This is correct in a very literal and pedantic sense. Facts are data, Logos, they cannot inherently care about anything. However, the beings you are meant to deliver said facts to are emotional creatures. Modern humans try their best to separate feelings from our daily life, but can never truly do so. We like to think when we take in information we are being completely objective and if something is said that is illogical our brains automatically “red flag” this information for us. This is not true. Pathos is the last pillar of the Rhetorical Triangle and it has to do with empathy, compassion, and heart. I once heard it said human behavior is the refraction of chemicals through the prism of our brains and bodies. This refraction expresses itself as emotions and it almost all happens subconsciously. For instance, when you see a small dog (unless you are part of the considerable population with psychosis), your conscious thoughts are probably something along the lines of “Aww, what a cute puppy.” Behind the scenes in your mind, the images you are taking in are being filtered through and compared to a lifetime of information. You’re recalling every interaction with small mammals you’ve had, you’re seeing the size of the creatures eyes and comparing it to other infant creatures you’ve interacted with, the chemicals in your brain associated with love and protection of loved ones are being spiked. Billions of these calculations happen in an instant, but it’s only consciously registered as the fuzzy emotions you feel when you see something that makes you say “Gucci-Gucci Goo-Goo.”* Such is the power of emotions. Using that same example, when recalling the story of the puppy you saw earlier, you won’t recall the music on the radio in the background or what the owner was wearing or maybe even what the color of the dog’s eyes were, but you will remember how the puppy made you feel. As a podcaster, you can convey emotions like this by speaking about things you are passionate about or telling stories you have a personal connection to. Nobody wants to hear a robot discuss facts and logic all day, but when coupled with personal, emotional things that pull at one’s heart strings, you can elevate meaningless factual content to a level that resonates and really sticks with a consumer.
To tie everything together, let’s think of one last example and outline everything that needs to be considered when trying to “sell” a story to an audience. You’re a podcaster and you’ve been asked to do an ad-read for a product in the mid-roll of your show. You really need to hit this one out of the park. The advertiser has provided some copy, but wants you to freestyle it a bit. This sounds daunting at first, but when run through the lens of the Rhetorical Triangle, it’s easy to form a game plan. First Ethos, establish what this brand is and what they stand for. The history of the company can be a good start. Furthermore, by the fact of reading the ad alone, your own Ethos is reestablished as someone whom this company trusts to do an ad read in the first place. You need only speak confidently and honestly and the company’s Ethos, as well as your own, remains intact. Next, you need to describe in detail what the product actually does. You need to show that you’ve actually used the product by describing something tangible about it you would only know from use. In this way, you are actually using Logos to reaffirm your Ethos. You’re using facts that could only originate from authentic use to confirm in the listeners mind you are someone who has genuinely used the product. Finally, you’ve used the product and you can talk about how it works, but how did it make you feel? How, therefore, should it make me feel? How did it apply to your personal life? Why is this company trusting you, a human, with this ad-read rather than a text-to-speech generator? When you talk about how a product or experience made you feel and what exactly occurred to make you arrive at those feelings, you are using Logos and Pathos to reinforce your unspoken Ethos.
Now you have a full understanding of what goes into a compelling piece of rhetoric. You can apply this lens of thought to any creative medium be it podcasting, video, debate, or writing. Through deeper study, you can be more aware of the ideas you allow into your mind and help you better craft those you give to others. Now you need only clear your throat, find a stage and a little extra time to ask yourself “why” like the modern philosopher you are.
Footnotes:
*Nobody has ever said this phrase. I used “Gucci” in the first two examples and desperately needed a third. I’m sorry.