As a part of Penn State Dance MaraTHON, I actively participate in fundraising. I am a member of an organization called Domani THON. Each year, students address THONvelopes to family and friends, asking for donations. I fell a bit behind and missed the deadline to send out THONvelopes. However, I can still reach out to family and friends via online donations. The operative phrase in that sentence is reach out. I have to decide what the best approach is to writing an email that will motivate my family and friends to make a donation online.
This experience is reminding me of rhetoric's ethos and pathos. I am writing many drafts of this email that will reach dozens of loved ones; asking myself which method of rhetoric is more appropriate: ethos or pathos. If I employ ethos, I will focus mainly on the credibility and character of THON. I will explain its financial success, the overall mission, my personal involvement, and the practical need for fundraising support. If I employ pathos, I will focus mainly on the emotional appeal of THON. I will explain the grueling treatment of pediatric cancer, the overwhelming statistics for victims, and some of the individual stories of a Four Diamonds Family. Which rhetoric is more effective? Which rhetoric is more appropriate? Is a combination of ethos and pathos the best approach? It is surprising how complicated a simple plea for money can become. I am struggling to decide which is the best rhetoric approach. I do not want the email to be an inexpressive, boring plea for donations if I lean too heavily on ethos. In contrast, I do not want the email to be an overemotional, zealous plea for donations if I lean too heavily on pathos. My ultimate goal is to reach out to the my loved ones in the most effective way so that they can help me in my fundraising goals for THON.
It boils down to this: Will my family and friends be more affected by an email that is sprinkled with ethos, or freckled with pathos?
I liked how Sandra stressed the importance of balance in her post. Ethos and pathos both work well individually, but the combination of both is what creates the most powerful an persuasive rhetoric. "The Art of Asking for Money" is a great example of the usefullness of rhetoric in Penn State and civic daily life.
ReplyDeleteThis is a really great point. Asking for money can be a hard and awkward thing, but I think if you use botha sprinkle of ethos and a freckle of pathos people will be more than willing to donate to this great cause.
ReplyDeleteI really like the way you presented the dilemma of sending out THONvelopes. I could tell that you wanted a healthy mixture of both but we all know that is hard. What kind of word or phrases would you use? Would you add pictures or videos to your loved ones to arouse pathos? These are some of the questions that I would ask myself if I were in your situation.
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed reading your blog!
Sandra, I like the way you stressed the importance of balance. Both ethos, and pathos work well individually, but collectivelly they can be used to create powerful rhetoric. I also liked how you related rhetoric to Penn State!
ReplyDeleteI think you do need a combination of ethos and pathos. If I were in your shoes, I would focus on the integrity of Thon while providing people with an example of what it's like to be a cancer patient. I think too much pathos is the greater danger because if all you do is talk about how the patients suffer, you incite a guilt complex which can detract from the emotions you want to get across, like some of those overly dramatic SPCA videos. Although they are heartbreaking while you watch, not many people actually go out and donate to the SPCA afterwards.
ReplyDeleteVery good job applying these concepts to a real life (and timely) situation.
ReplyDelete