Cross-Cultural Blog

This post has been created by Global Learning students from Khabarovsk, Russia, for the Stanford-Orebro-Khabarovsk exchange. The exchange is aimed at raising intercultural competence and global awareness of students and faculty
By Dmitry Galenko, Galina Trotskaya, Olesya Stadnik

Names of people constitute an important part of culture.
Name means a lot for every person and it is his first identification in the society. Names are culturally bound and names are used accordingly in each country. It is important to understand the difference each culture treats names.
Our research is devoted to Russian names, their forms, influence on personality

What is the name?

Galya: When we think of somebody we remember not that particular person but his or her name. When we speak to somebody we communicate with a name. When there are only two people communicating and there is no need to call your interlocutor by the name, still we do it. We call our interlocutor by his or her name.

Russian names

Dmitry: Hi! My name is Dmitry. Let me tell you about Russian names. There are many names, popular and forgotten, old and new, national and borrowed from other nations.

Olesya: Russian names. According to the statistics, these are the most popular Russian names. For men – Danil, Nikita, Evgenyi, Fedor, Alexander, Bogdan, Michail, Maxim. For women – Anastasiya, Olesya, Elizaveta, Alexandra, Anna, Evgenya, Darina, Maria, Valeria

Dmitry: When we refer to people or talk about them, we often do not use pronouns the way they are used in English, because in Russian the form of the verb reflects the category of person and number, so we do not need to use pronouns the way they are used in English.
Words like ‘Mr’, ‘Ms’, ‘Ser’ etc also exist in Russia. We used to have different words to refer to people (like ‘comrade’ or ‘citizen‘ and others) in USSR. Nowadays we do not use those words, we can just say ‘man’ or ‘guy’. In formal situations, people would address the audience “ladies and gentlemen”. Moreover, sometimes we do not use any words to refer to a person. It is enough to say ‘excuse me’ to draw someone’s attention. However, if we know the person’s name, we use only name to refer to a person.

Our names can also be short and full. My full name is Dmitry and the short form is Dima (it sounds [‘di:ma])
Some short forms of names are similar in male and female versions, though they may differ in full versions. For example, short name Sasha is both male and female name, and the full version varies depending on gender: Alexander is a male name, Alexandra is a female one.

Short names often sound similar to the full ones, and the majority of short forms retain the beginning of the full name. For example Olga – Olya [‘O:lya], Valentina[Va len ‘ti na] – Valya [‘Va: lja]. For some names, short variants are very informal, so when talking formally, these names have only the full version.

When addressing politely a grown up person, whose name we already know, we use first and middle names. For young people we usually use just the first name, either in formal or informal talk.
Russian middle name is formed from the person’s father’s name. So, our middle names are called patronymic names. These middle names always end with ‘-itch’ for men and ‘-vna’ for women. For example, my father is Vladimir and my middle name is Vladimirovitch. So formally I will be addressed Dmitri Vladimirovich

How do names affect people?

Galya: Last year, in May, 20, there was demonstrated a TV programme ‘Incredibility theory’, which dwelled on the connection between a name and a person’s fate. It was pointed out that some people can even feel negative influence, produced by their names. And later, on the public opinion polls, they showed the attitude of some people towards their names: ‘I feel that my name prevents me from better life, or I’m sure I won’t gain any success having such a name’. A lot of answers similar to those were registered.

Olesya: My name is Olesya. It`s Ukrainian name which means ‘a forest girl’. I don`t know, if my name and its meaning have any influence on me. I like forests and I like nature... But I don`t think that the personality depends only on name.

Dmitry: I think names affect people. Sometimes I feel that people with the same name have similar characters. Maybe that is a stereotype, because often it is not true. Still, depending on a person, we can say which names would suit him. I think people may also be affected by the name when they learn what their name means. But I for example just don’t know the translation or the meaning of my name. Actually, I don’t care about it

Why people change names?

Galya: During history, shaman organized change name ceremonies, because they believed that it could help to cure a person. Cure happened because besides new name a person got new emotions from the outside. And we know that emotions are means of passing vital energy from one person to another, which is the strongest medicine
A name identifies a person. It is an identification mark for each of us. I believe that if we change our names we can change the life or even start a new one. A lot of people understand it and it urges them on changing their names. Sometimes, people change melodious names to ordinary ones. What would the reasons be? I think, people feel the effect of the name on their own life

Very often people choose names which provide melody or vibration. Unfortunately, people cannot even suppose that choosing inappropriate name can have dramatic effect on person’s fate, and provoke long depression and even strong mental disorder

Olesya: I really like my name-it`s neither rare, nor very widespread. I don`t want to change my name. Because I`m satisfied with my name and I regard it`s too hard to get used to a new name.
There are two main reasons why Russian people change names:

1) they move to the other country and it is very hard to understand or pronounce their names on the language of that country. They don’t want to be unique abroad
2) they simply don`t like it!!!

But why is it so? Some people, who have very widespread names, want to be unique. They want to show that their names reflect special features of their personality.
BUT, on the contrary, people who have unusual unique names from their birth, want to change their names to something more usual! It is hard for them to communicate with people.

Of course, there are some other reasons to change names. For example, fashion. People want to have MODERN names. Every year some new names come into fashion and some become out of date. Another reason of changing name is deep love to some literature character, movie hero, or a TV star. As for me, in my childhood I wanted to change my name and to be called Alice because I liked the book «Alice in Wonderland» very much.

In Russia parents can change a child’s name until he/she is 10. After the child is 10 and before he/she is 14, parents can change his/her name only if he/she wants to. From the age 14 to 18 you can change your name, but only if your parents agree. After 18 years, you yourself can change your name

Some ideas on nicknames

Galya: very often people make up different names for their friends. For example, I call my best friend O-LYA-LYA though her real name is Olya. Or we make Svetik out of Svetlana, Pusik out of Sasha or whatever. We define such names as made up names. Such names reveal our personal close attitude towards this or that person. This is often our subconscious choice. So the way we call a person carries our sincere attitude to him/her. And we know that emotions are means of passing vital energy from one person to another, which is the strongest medicine

Olesya: My friends and relatives call me Lesya and it`s good – but I don`t like when a person whom I don`t know well calls me so. People who love me call me Lesechka or Lesenka (diminutive suffix). Friends in the internet like to call me Lisenok or LeiSAN (these friends like Japanese culture). My nicknames are Panda (because it`s my favorite animal), LOVINGSEA (because I was born in the city, which is located on the seashore, and I like to watch the sea. I think my nicknames show what am I like, and they reflect my character a bit=))

According to the statistics, most popular Russian nicknames are: Noob, partisan (it`s russian word meaning ‘a guerrilla’), monkey, Killer (Sometimes the real name of a persom may be Kirill), Cat (The real name may be Katya for female, or Kostya for male), Hare (Or bunny), Angel, Kitty, Lucky, Happy, Sweet, Rabbit, Honey, Godfather

Dmitry: people who surf the Internet or play computer games choose nicknames for themselves. What is special about Russians is that some users try to write Russian letters using English ones. Like, English ‘n’ looks like a letter from the Russian alphabet that sounds like [p]. Some others are: ‘p’ sounds like [r], ‘H’ sounds like [n]. ‘bI’ looks like one letter, that sounds like [i], and a number ‘3’ looks like Russian [z]. But words written like that are not very easy to read for some Russians, especially grown-ups, who do not know about that way of writing

We have some questions about names to you!

What are the most popular names in your country?
How much do you think names affect people?
Is it good to change your name? Have you ever changed it?
What nicknames are popular where you live? What nicknames do you use?

Thank you! It will be nice to know your opinions abot names!

Posted by Khvaborsk Intercultural Business Class, Russia at 06:43 AM | Permalink | Comments (7)

The globalization increases. So does the importance of knowledge and understanding for other cultures. Knowledge about how cultural resemblances and differences affect our behavior, and understanding for another cultures attitude, norms and values. This is of outermost importance in business related situations between people from different countries.

The foreign trade between Sweden and Switzerland has increased rapidly in recent years.
Both countries are competent and they have a strong internationalization and a well functioning cooperation.
Due to the evolving relation between Sweden and Switzerland, and my curiosity in the Swiss culture from living in the country for a period of time, I chose to compare the two national cultures with each other.
I asked myself which cultural similarities and differences there are between the countries. I used literature to try to find an answer to this question, but I mainly used Hofstedes Cultural Dimensions to compare and study how the countries related to the four dimensions, Power distance, Individualism, Masculinity and Uncertainty avoidance.
I did an interview with Jacob Wahlberg who is a jurist at Assa Abloy. He is in daily contact with executives from Switzerland and has been collaborating with them for many years. I was interested in how the national cultures influence on a negotiation between the countries. Does Jacob find it different and more complicated to negotiate with Swiss people and if so, what are the differences and resemblances? What is his opinion about the extremely diverted sight on women’s roles in the society, and does it affect the business relation? In addition to the interview, I collected the empirical data from my own experience from living in Switzerland. I also did an interview with Laura Wey, a girl that originally comes from Switzerland but she now lives and works in Sweden.

As a result, after studying the cultures I would say that there are obvious similarities but also many differences between them. They are both two individualistic cultures where you strive for independence and self- reliant. There is no hierarchy and the organizations are constructed with flat decision-making. We have the same sight on work, relations and career, and the fact that we have similar organization structure is a great advantage when we are making business with each other.

There are differences as well. The most evident one according to me is the high masculinity index, and the strong uncertainty avoidance in Switzerland. A woman is not seen and treated as we are used to in Sweden. This might cause a problem in a business situation, because there is a big awareness about men and women’s equality in Sweden.

After doing my study, I realized that it is almost impossible to draw conclusions about the differences between two national cultures because they are dynamic and changes all the time. Also when you compare two cultures, you have to generalize on a national level and assume that a whole nation thinks and acts in the same way. It is difficult because it is a fact that people are not handling conflicts and problems in the same way just because they belong to a specific culture. Hofstedes study; Cultural Dimensions was made many years ago and that makes it even more complicated because a lot has happened since then.
I did compare the national cultures, but one has to keep in mind that my conclusions are generalizations and also a sampling of the total of a culture at one certain moment in time.
Therefore, it is important to adapt to the individual and the specific situation you are in.

Anna Quist Örebro university

Posted by Orebro Intercultural Rhetoric Class, Sweden at 11:12 AM | Permalink | Comments (13) | TrackBacks (0)

Communicating with strangers can to some people be scaring and instead of trying they avoid it. But sometimes you can’t avoid it. When it comes to communicating in business related situations you can’t avoid it. If you are working with an international company, the chance that you are interacting with people from a different culture or country is relative big. The chance that the meeting will go smoothly is also big, but there is a small risk that there will be problem or culture relative difficulties. There are different ways to succeed in such situations and to overcome obstacles that can be in the way of a successful piece of business.

There are especially two ways to work with intercultural communication. The first one is preparations. If you, for example, are about to do business with India, it’s a good idea to do some research about the country. There are specific books about business related information. It is also good to get to know the culture a little better, for example, what is the religion in the country? What is the correct way to greet a person living in India? If you take some time and do your research well you can avoid a lot of misunderstandings and you don’t have to be afraid that you are insulting anyone.

Of course, by just reading books and do research, there is nearly impossible to learn everything about a country and its culture. But in combination with experience you have a good foundation to work with intercultural communication. Experience is what it sounds like, something you learn and gather while working. It is a great thing to observe other people whom working and communicating international. And don’t be afraid to ask, that is always better then don’t knowing. It should be a fun thing to work international and with the right preparation it is! So don’t be afraid, go out there and explore other countries and cultures!

Kristin Evertsson, Örebro University

Posted by Orebro Intercultural Rhetoric Class, Sweden at 05:37 AM | Permalink | Comments (58) | TrackBacks (0)

One of the weakest things about mankind is the fact that we get scared when we’re facing something unfamiliar. We systemize and interpret our surroundings, in order to deal with everyday life. This is the reason for us making stereotypes and being prejudice. Every time we meet an individual that doesn’t belong to our own culture we feel some degree of uncertainty and anxiety. In a globalized business world this may even be the reason for big business deals going to waste. William B. Gudykunst has constructed a theory of how to overcome this fear. It’s called Anxiety and Uncertainty Management.

We can take a young, newly educated business traveler for example. In his first meeting with another culture, e.g. his first business trip to China, he’s feeling nervous because he can’t predict how the person he’s going to meet will respond or react to his presence. He doesn’t know that the head of the Chinese company probably will find it unnecessary to listen to the young man, because of the fact that his not in a high position in his company. This is a consequence of how the hierarchic system in China differs from the flat organization that the young man is used to in his home country. Our newly educated friend will be surprised and caught off guard, and won’t be able to tackle this problem. If he had been prepared of the fact that this might happen, he would at least stand a chance to manage the situation.

Anxiety & uncertainty management prepares an individual for this kind of situation. The concept is building on making individuals reach mindfulness, e.g. by learning about different cultures, and controlling their level of uncertainty and anxiety. Curiosity, trust, empathy and self confidence are all key words in the process.

Those who are critical to the anxiety & uncertainty management theory mean that it is all too focused on what problems and chaos an intercultural meeting can lead to. I would personally agree with the criticism, but with some level of reservation. Education before an intercultural meeting is absolutely necessary. Not because all meetings lead to trouble, but because some may. The education should prepare the individual of all possible scenarios, both positive and negative. Another thing important to remember is that that this type of education in no way completely prepares you for meeting another culture. On the contrary, it is very shallow. It should be considered as a preparation and an introduction to other cultures – a push in the right direction, so to speak. In addition, it is very hard to find updated literature about different cultures. The material that you find is all too often written decades ago, and cannot be considered up to date. To summarize; a competent cross cultural communicator has the ability to listen, imitate and adapt to any possible situation. That is what Anxiety & Uncertainty Management is all about.

Ola Runfors, Örebro University

Posted by Orebro Intercultural Rhetoric Class, Sweden at 05:30 AM | Permalink | Comments (3) | TrackBacks (0)

- An intercultural analysis regarding sport and marketing
In our modern, developed community sport has become very important, which means that sport has created its own community area with social, cultural and commercial functions. During the twentieth century a strong growth with different sports, whose practician are professional or amateur, takes place. At competitions, for example The Olympic Games or The World Championship, the national identity grows stronger. The grandstands fill with people wearing different, national symbols and national anthems sings diligent. Feelings like; pride, happiness, anger and sorrow gets an outlet in these situations. This points out how strong people can feel about sport and its context. Sport fills people with interest and compassion. A central perspective, for my description, is the significance of physical activity on an individual level. Training is, for a lot o people, an important element for everyday use, which pave the ways for a commercial market.

The market is huge and many different companies compete against each other to convince the consumers of their products. Clothes, shoes and sport attributes constantly develop to improve earlier models. Many companies act on a world market, which demands an intercultural competence. A cultural awareness, which becomes a tool to catch insight and interpret peoples mentality. This knowledge increases the creativity, but also gives an opportunity to understand people’s situations and different needs. Among the greatest sport companies are; Reebok, Nike and Adidas. Nike is the object for my analysis and study.
Nike has a web site where the consumers actively have to make some choices. These choices concerns; language, nationality, gender and age. The choices regarding language and nationality are one of many aspects that tell us that; Nike varies its marketing culturally depending on target group!
I have compared Nike’s marketing directed to women in different nations to support my theory. My comparison is between advertising films directed to European versus Japanese women. These advertising films can easily be found on www.nikewomen.com. In the films Nike uses different female international sport stars. European sport stars for European consumers and Asian sport stars for Japanese consumers.
Japan is a collectivistic country; the collectivity’s goals are valued over the individual. The communications meaning is often to be found in the situation, which tells us that Japan has a high – context culture. You can easily find signs of this in the Asian advertising films, for example the girls are non-verbal. In contrast to this the European films has signs of low-context culture and an individualistic angle of approach. The girls talk a lot of their feelings and reflections about their sport.
While working with this project many questions arise; Is it right to use different advertising films in different nations or does it only increase peoples prejudices? I have also future reflections. Cultures changes constantly so can the increased globalization, we today face, help us understand and reduce prejudices between people and nations?

Sarah Wirsén Örebro University

Posted by Orebro Intercultural Rhetoric Class, Sweden at 04:15 AM | Permalink | Comments (7)

The way to license music is increasingly becoming easier with the emergence and popularity of creative commons. Game developers can find suitable background music not in the traditional way (like securing license from the publisher by paper documentation) but using online licensing solutions. It could be possible to find suitable songs as theme for the games which does not usually happen in the past. With the increasing supply of music but decreasing demand, music publishers face a challenge to find suitable solutions to market music; one of them is offering consumers a free license of the music.

However not it is not a full license, but offering them a short sample say 45 seconds is enough even for game developers and film movie directors.

Posted by Stanford: Visual Rhetoric Across the Globe at 08:13 PM | Permalink | Comments (14) | TrackBacks (0)

Привет!

Мы студенты из Стэнфордского Университета в США и мы очень рады иметь возможность с вами общаться!

Hello, students from Khavaborsk and Oerebro!

This is Chris, Melissa, and Simon and we’re from Chicago, Los Angeles, and South Korea respectively. We are all sophomores at Stanford University! Chris is an economics major who likes to breakdance on his spare time. Melissa is pre-law and likes to play tennis! (And penguins!!) Simon is a materials science and engineering major and he likes to play soccer.

We would like to share with you a bit about Stanford culture. Stanford is a very liberal college and people feel very free to just talk to strangers on campus. Stanford has a wide-range of student groups, such as fraternities, minority groups, and pre-professional clubs. Because Stanford is a private institution and is smaller than public universities, there is a greater amount of interaction between students in classes and in extracurricular activities. Stanford is also a community devoted to service related activities, and so we have a lot of students interested in volunteer and non-profit groups.

Christophe:
What are the first words you think of when you hear the name “Bill Gates?” For the overwhelming majority, the words “rich,” “wealthy,” and “genius” come to mind. At the same time, philanthropic foundations in the United States are known for being wasteful and ineffective. For my research project I explored the context and strategy of the rhetoric of Bill Gates in regards to his recent work from the Gates Foundation. How does Bill Gates’ use his almost mythical success as an entrepreneur and his newfound identity as “the next Carnegie” to build partnerships in the world of philanthropy and export his vision of using business approaches to philanthropy? In exploring this thesis, I contrasted Andrew Carnegie’s “Gospel of Wealth” and Bill Gates’ first “Annual letter from the Foundation.” This gave me real insight into using different styles of speech (high vs. middle) and how to collaborate with people who may have large egos (other billionaires). It also allowed me to partially construct Bill Gates’ personality and his extreme acuteness when dealing with people and building partnerships.

My research ends on an optimistic note, urging private citizens to take note that philanthropic foundations should be accountable to the tax-paying body. This paper has led me to be very interested in the multi-billion dollar industry of private philanthropy, and I have high hopes that Bill Gates can use his ethos to urge many of his fellow foundation heads to take responsibility for their effectiveness, or lack thereof.

Melissa:
First of all, I think one of the most important things I’ve taken away from taking this amazing rhetoric of leadership class is the preparation that goes into giving an effective presentation. Before I didn’t realize that transforming a research paper into a speech/presentation takes a lot of work and creative energy! My research paper discussed changes in feminist rhetoric through time, specifically exploring the rhetoric used by Gloria Steinem and Elizabeth Cady Stanton. I found that the reason Stanton’s speeches still remain so powerful today is she uses the basic philosophical idea of individualism that appeals to a universal audience and transcends time. On the contrary, I found that Steinem had generalizations and logical fallacies in her speeches that weakened the power of her rhetoric. Thus, I feel that feminists today should learn by Stanton’s example and promote gender equality by using rhetoric that has a universal appeal and includes men, instead of alienating them.

I would love to hear you thoughts on my research and would be happy to answer any questions you have! =)

Simon:
There is only one nation on earth where you can still see the living examples of the Cold War. Ever since 1950, the Korean peninsula has been in war, and to this day it still remains to be divided.

My research on presidential rhetoric for Korean unification came to a conclusion that the rhetoric despite its long history over half a century has actually not changed ever since the beginning of separation. The ‘one-people, one-nation’ argument has been the impetus for the unification rhetoric, and I found its limitations in different historical cases of presidential rhetoric. Former President Kim Dae-jung, a Nobel Peace Prize laureate for his efforts of promoting democracy and reconciliation with North Korea, employed rhetoric of democracy and freedom in East Asia, and my conclusion supports his rhetoric with more global and universal basis for the fundamental argument of unification.
At the end, what I realized was that it is no longer an issue only concerning Korea but the whole world. I hope to see the two Korea’s united and come together finally through global communities support and love for peace.

Abstract to Sound Foundations: The strategic importance of rhetoric in Billanthropy:

Bill Gates has arguably created more economic value than any single person in modern history. The emergence of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, a multipronged, multibillion-dollar philanthropic enterprise, signals a second wave of super philanthropy, dubbed by The Economist as “Philanthrocapitalism.” But for Bill Gates’ revolutionary approach to domestic and international development to maintain both comprehensiveness and sustainability, there must be a fundamental change in our perception of philanthropy in the United States. The first part of this paper will examine modern perceptions of philanthropy as a result of Carnegie’s philosophy, and how its poor record of success suggests a need for change in how foundations operate. I will then explore the mission and operational principles of the Gates Foundation, before explaining how Bill Gates uses rhetoric and leverages his ethos to market his brand of philanthrocapitalism.

Abstract to Changes in Feminist Rhetoric:

Great strides have been made in the feminist movement, but gender equality still has not been achieved. With the gender disparity in wages and resilient glass ceiling, among other issues, feminism is still as relevant today as it was over two centuries ago when the movement first began. However, for many women and men today, the feminist movement is considered irrelevant, radical, or alienating. Therefore it is crucial that feminist leaders today use rhetoric and reasoning that can persuade both women and men of the importance of continuing the fight for gender equality. In my paper, I present my argument that Elizabeth Cady Stanton draws upon the theme of individualism, appealing universally to her audience’s humanity while, on the contrary, Gloria Steinem uses broad generalizations containing logical fallacies that weaken the power of her rhetoric.

Abstract to Living in Glacier of the Cold War: Separation of the Two Korea’s and Presidential Rhetoric for Reunification:

There is only one place on earth where you can still witness the living examples of the Cold War—that is Korea. As if more than five-thousand-year history as one nation has been completely forgotten, the Korean peninsula ever since 1945 has been divided into North and South and still remains divided almost sixty year later.
There have been many efforts for the unification of the two Korea’s, especially by the Presidents of the republic of Korea. Indeed, this issue of unification was very simple back in 1960’s and 70’s. North and South Koreans were brothers and sisters, quite literally so, and thus the reason for unification was taken for granted. However, in modern Korean history, as it reaches almost sixty years of history as separated nations, and as the generations of the Korean War grow old and the new come along, it is questionable whether one can take the reasons for unification as granted anymore.
As a sole democratic representative of the peninsula, President of the Republic of Korea wields enormous power as well as responsibility in this issue of reuniting the two Korea’s. By looking at the historical examples of presidential rhetoric for unification, this paper suggests the need for a paradigm shift in unification rhetoric from an ethnocentric, nationalist one to a philosophically broader and more encompassing one based on the ideals of democracy and freedom.

Posted by Stanford Global Leadership Class at 11:44 AM | Permalink | Comments (18)

Salam, muraho!
(that’s hello in Arabic, Kinyarwanda :))

Sarah: I am originally from Jordan and this is my second year at the fabulous Stanford University. My long-term goal in life is to return to Jordan, and using the skills and connections I have made here in the US, help my country go from a developing to a developed nation. Originally, I thought the best way to do this is to become involved with the UN or non-profit work, but last year, I read a book called The Fortune at the Bottom of the Pyramid by C. K. Prahalad that completely blew me out of the water and made me question all my presumptions. This book argues that the best way to improve a country’s welfare is to start a for-profit and treat the lower class population – or the ‘bottom of the pyramid’, as the book refers to them – as consumers, and not charity cases. By engaging them as discerning consumers, and providing them with the products and services they need, you can greatly improve their standard of living.

Questions for the students in Örebro and Khaborovsk, out there in cyberspace:
What do you think about Prahalad’s proposal? Do you think his business/consumerism model is a better model for development than philanthropic work?
What about ethics? Do you think that it is unethical to make a profit from those in the lower class?

Ingrid: It is really interesting that you post your age in your intro! Where I am from in Rwanda, it’s quite normal to include your age in your intro, just like you guys did, Contrary to here in America, where it is not that common to have age as relevant in a introduction; so talking of intercultural, this is something!
My research topic was analyzing the rhetoric of raising awareness for social justice, specifically the rhetoric that Dr. Paul Farmer, the founder of Partners in Health (a non-profit organization that provides medical services to the poor- see pih.org) uses to raise awareness for social justice. I was interested in this topic because I had a suspicion that raising awareness about social justice has become an end in itself instead of it being a tool to have Social Justice. I found that the reason why raising awareness becomes an end in itself is because the term “raising awareness” is ambiguous; as a leader whose goal is Taking action and creating change, your rhetoric has to always emphasize the start point and the end point- the problem at hand and the transformation that you are working for. A leader has to thoroughly understand the problem he/she is dealing with and the transformation that needs to occur, most of the time, to understand these things means learning from the people concerned with the problem you want to solve; their culture, customs, beliefs, their suffering, their ideas…

Questions:
Is activism for Social Change is something commonly done in Universities in Sweden?

Take a look at the abstracts of the research projects we each worked on this quarter and let us know what you think:

Abstract for Ingrid's paper:
Raising awareness is incorporated in everyday life encounters, from videos of Bono talking about poverty and Save Darfur wristbands distributed at events in high schools; raising awareness is a vital tool in affecting Social Change. Effective Raising Awareness incites the population to take action. It brings a change and a solution to a problem. This paper explores the mechanisms between raising awareness and Taking action. My argument is that the rhetoric used in raising awareness will determine whether your raising awareness begets taking action, or whether your raising awareness begets more raising awareness. By using Dr. Paul Farmer’s rhetoric as a model, I claim that the rhetoric of transformation used in effective raising awareness and not used in ineffective raising awareness is the main difference between effective awareness raising and ineffective raising awareness.

Abstract for Sarah's paper:
After more than sixty years of failed negotiations, many Arabs believe that little can be done to see a resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. However, the Palestinian Leadership does have the means to broker a definitive peace deal with Israel, by first committing a reformation of the style of rhetoric it employs. In this paper, I argue that the choice of rhetoric employed by Palestinian leaders is of colossal consequence. The rhetoric employed by the current ruling party, Hamas, is greatly hurting the Palestinians’ self-interest, and I demonstrate this by examining the party’s rhetoric and the Israeli response to this rhetoric. Hamas should abandon the line of rhetoric they currently employ and instead opt to adopt a style of rhetoric that emulates that of Palestinian Statesman Haydar ‘Abd Al-Shafi at the 1991 Madrid Peace Conference, whose opening address I analyze rhetorically. Informed by the findings of the rhetorical analyses, I put forth a preliminary model whose recommendations the Palestinian Leadership should use to fashion a policy of rhetoric that will manifest enormous impact on the progress of peace negotiations.

Posted by Stanford Global Leadership Class at 11:42 AM | Permalink | Comments (16) | TrackBacks (0)

(From Left: Jesse, Elissa, Kelcey and Grant)

Kelcey: Hi there! I am 19 years old and I am originally from Seattle, Washington. I am studying International Relations and French. In my free time I like to travel, hang out with my friends, and dance. I love it here at Stanford, though I wish the tuition was free like it is in other countries. The campus is absolutely beautiful and the sun is finally coming out again! We have one week until our final exams so students are beginning to pack the libraries. One of my friends works in marketing for Starbucks (a coffee company). She walked all over campus this weekend passing out free Starbucks double shot drinks, which are very caffeinated and will be helpful for the long nights of studying ahead (I may want to find her before I head to the library this afternoon!).

What are your school schedules like? How often do you have class and for how long?
Do you travel in the summertime?
What are your favorite foods? Any traditional dishes?
How many languages do you speak?
I’ve never been to Sweden or Russia; if I were to travel there, which cities should I visit?

Through this class, I have found that I am even more interested in rhetoric than I originally thought I was. My research concerning George Mitchell, President Obama’s Special Envoy to the Middle East, has left me fascinated with how other nations perceive America. The American government has created a negative reputation for itself in the last few years, arguably one of arrogance which threatens our relations with other countries. Do you believe it is possible to reform America’s reputation through speech? If so, how?
I tend to think optimistically and I believe rhetoric is essential for effective leadership. I would love to hear about how you believe American leaders can successfully communicate with other countries. Would this mean the elimination of religious allusions?

Elissa: Hello everyone! My name is Elissa Flandro and I’m a sophomore majoring in Architectural Design within the Civil Engineering Department at Stanford. I’ve lived in Boise, Idaho my whole life. In Idaho, I like to spend my time skiing during the winter and relaxing in the great outdoors during the summer. I am part Native American, and my research for this class was centered on the leadership of my tribe, the Kalispels.
During this quarter, I really enjoyed learning about the general characteristics of leaders as seen through different cultural perspectives. While blogging with Uppsala, Sweden, Jesse and I found that we had completely different views on what an effective speech incorporates, compared to the students in Sweden. The two students from Sweden were shocked to hear a speech given by Bono, which contained many religious references. The students explained that a political speaker would never think to include religious themes in his speech, as it would be offensive and out of place. For me, this goes to show that leaders must adapt their strategies to the needs of those they lead.
Stanford life definitely fosters the creation of great leaders. I think the diversity within the Stanford community is its best trait. Before coming to Stanford, I really didn’t know many international students. My knowledge regarding culture and religions was pretty limited, as I went to private Catholic school for twelve years….! I’ve loved learning about the diverse lives of my friends over the past two years. It’s broadened my thoughts about global leadership and made me more open minded.

Why would Americans include religion so much more frequently in their speeches?
How did Obama do this during his campaign?

Jesse: Hi everyone! My name is Jesse Peters and I’m a sophomore from Martinez, CA. In my free time I like to sing with my acapella group, chill with my friends, listen to music, and play basketball and soccer. This quarter, we learned about the rhetoric of leadership. I became interested in leaders who had brought their nations in dark and dangerous directions and how this sort of leadership could be avoided. I ended up focusing my research for the quarter on George W. Bush, seen through the lens of Adolf Hitler—focusing on their emotive rhetoric.

Grant: Hi guys! My name is Grant Newsome. I’m a Junior at Stanford majoring in Sociology. I’m from the Southside of Chicago and am a die-hard cubs fan. In my free time, I work on producing music and extracurricular social work. In PWR 2, I conducted research about the rhetoric of African-American development that was extremely valuable to me as an aspiring public speaker and teacher. Particularly, the most valuable aspect of this research that I acquired was methods of analyzing rhetoric. I was better able to break down my own style of delivery in presentations and seminars and breakdown the styles of others to understand what works and what doesn’t with my target audience. Furthermore, the class was very engaging and taught extremely well my our committed professor Alyssa O’Brien. The process that I undertook to construct my eventual research-based argument was very detailed, which was arduous at first, but ended up producing a finished product that I feel legitimately addresses the questions of the project. What I really looked for in PWR 2, however, was more training with presentation and my usage of multimedia or visual aids to supplement my oral delivery. I spent a good deal of time on my presentation and making sure that I put in material that would engage my audience but not take away from the power of oral delivery. Overall, I felt this class really helped me become a better researcher and presenter. I hope to be able to incorporate what I learned in this class into any social service work I do in the future.

Posted by Stanford Global Leadership Class at 11:32 AM | Permalink | Comments (13) | TrackBacks (0)

Greetings-
Our names are Jisas and Tom, and we are currently sophomores at Stanford University. We are from in Samburu, Kenya and Kensington, Maryland, which are both quite a ways from Stanford and Sweden and Russia. Right now, we are just coming to the close of our winter quarter, which means the weather is getting nice and it's difficult to study for finals. We had a great time in our rhetoric class studying the oral techniques of different leaders, from Barack Obama, to ordinary people who posted videos on Youtube. Our class focused on the different aspects of rhetorical communication and presentation, and below our reflections on the class are posted. We are excited to be sharing this blog with you guys, and look forward to hearing from you. We're very curious to learn about how your views on the art of oral persuasion.

Jisas's Reflection:
Hi, my name is Jisas Lemasagarai. I was born in a very remote part of north Kenya called Samburu district. This is where I grew up until my 14th birthday when I moved to Nairobi for my high school education. My time in this district was a love hate affair. While I love the place because it is my home and the place where people I love reside, it is also a place where I witnessed the effects of armed tribal conflict. It is also the place that sent me to the best High School in Kenya and consequently Stanford University.
Now as a sophomore planning to major in either Mechanical Engineering or Management Science and Engineering, I have had a different experience of life here. Stanford and its culture is nothing that I have ever imagined in my wildest dreams. I have met many people from different corners of the world and each of this people has a different story and background. The thing that I love most about meeting people from different parts of the world is that you get to learn so many different views on day to day events.
Taking a writing and rhetoric class this quarter (Global Controversies and Practical Rhetoric for Leadership), has been very satisfying for me. First of all, I had one of the best teachers of my short Stanford career. Dr. Alyssa O’Brien was always positive about my research (The Rhetoric of gunrunning) and she really helped me focus and re-focus my argument. What started out as an expansive topic that in her words could make up an eight chapter book turned out to be a nine page research-based argument. I can’t thank her enough for this. I loved the fact that she guided me towards my own realization of how to focus my argument, something that made the experience a lot satisfying. I mean, have you ever met someone that reads a paper that you have written and then goes ahead to tell you how to put your argument instead of guiding you to bring it out the way you intended? That was the difference for me while doing my research; Dr. O’Brien guided me to bring out the ideas I had in my mind.
Although my classmates come from different countries, all of them are unified by the Stanford culture that makes it easy for people to engage intellectually about different perspectives and cultures while respecting the different viewpoints. The end product of my research could not have been possible without the input of my classmates. This may have been in form of peer review, expanding on my ideas or just learning about their views on my topic as well as providing a great academic and friendly atmosphere for research and learning.
I therefore feel like I have been enabled by this class. While I have researched how one man used rhetoric to hide a hideous gunrunning business that caused the loss of lives of millions and how this reflects on a failure of global leadership, I have also come to the conclusion that my class embodied the kind of leadership that I would like to see in the world. Though only on a small scale, there was a great sense of purpose and energy in the class. It was especially great listening to all those inspiring presentations with great ideas about leadership and global controversies, all guided by some cool multimedia.
Everyone touched on some really important aspect of leadership and its rhetoric. In general the message was either lauding positive leadership or espousing on negative use of rhetoric and how we can learn from these different scenarios. I think recognizing the different use of rhetoric is leadership in itself.

Tom's Reflection:
Greetings! My name is Tom Kramer, and I am sophomore at Stanford majoring in Political Science. I also live about ten minutes from Washington, D.C., and so I have had a lot of exposure to politics and government by living so close to the nation’s capital. Attending a school like Stanford is a tremendous experience, as it has exposed me to numerous viewpoints and an intellectual atmosphere unlike any I have been involved with before.
I think that what I have learned, more than anything else in the Program in Writing and Rhetoric, is the value of preparation, to which I am sure you can relate. This applies to both oral and written projects. My project for my class, named Global Controversies and the Practical Rhetoric of Leadership, dealt with the rhetoric surrounding Guantanamo Bay and the treatment of U.S. military prisoners. It required a significant amount of research, and it was necessary for me to plan out my research and writing well in advance. I believe that good planning contributed greatly to well-crafted essay. On a similar note, my oral presentation required a great deal of planning as well. The process began as early as two weeks before the presentation, as I converted my written argument into an oral script. After that, I gave my speech in two practice sessions, which enabled me to revise certain parts and make my oral argument much stronger. I think the amount of time spent preparing and practicing such an oral speech is directly correlated to its strength and persuasiveness.
By going through the process of learning how to craft an oral argument in this class, I think that I learned something very important about leadership. That is, the ability to lead, persuade, and motivate does not come easily. It requires preparation and dedication on the part of a leader, to the point where they spend a lot of time developing and practicing their rhetoric, both written and oral. I also learned that the amount of preparation for oral presentations has much to do with the type of style that the speaker employs. In my presentation, I used a very high style of rhetoric, and I realized that making sure my presentation was well-organized and devoid of any problems was especially important. When using a high style, the speaker becomes very serious, and this characteristic does not lend itself well to any problems, issues, or mishaps with the presentation. For example, if in a presentation using high style the projector suddenly cuts out, the speaker’s credibility is damaged by a perceived lack of preparation. This contrasts with the use of low style, which I believe can adapt and react very well to any problems encountered in a presentation. In the same situation, the incident may be taken much more lightly and the speaker may be able to maintain the attention of the audience by the use of a low style of rhetoric.

Our abstracts from our research essays:

Jisas's abstract:
The 1990s were a time of civil conflicts in many regions of the world. Many of these conflicts have continued into the new millennium and some are still ongoing even as we speak. This paper argues that Viktor Bout, the most notorious gunrunner of all time managed to supply firearms to the conflict regions by masking his hideous operations behind a clever rhetoric that described him as an innocent international businessman who engaged in transportation. The paper shows the effects the few public utterances that Bout made had on his employees and clients. His utterances were thematic and sought to unify the rhetoric that came out of his complicated business enterprise. In the process, Bout managed to establish a reputation for himself among his clients as a very dependable businessman who delivered commissioned cargo at all costs. The paper also argues that it is partly because of the innocence of Bout’s rhetoric that he managed to remain out of the limelight and as such carried out his activities without attracting the attention of world intelligence services. Ultimately the paper points out that the Boutian story is a story that highlights the failure of international leadership and disregard for international security.

Tom's Abstract:
America’s treatment of detainees at Guantanamo Bay and other military prisons during the War on Terror cast doubt on U.S. aims and greatly damaged its credibility. These practices turned international public opinion against the United States, and its image in the world suffered. The practices of the Bush Administration were justified by appeals to emotion and fear that alluded to the threats of additional terrorist attacks. This paper argues that public reaction against U.S. treatment of detainees was based upon an inherent American ethos that can be traced back to the founding principles and founding documents of the United States. This paper shows how the rhetoric of leaders, intellectuals, Supreme Court justices, and even ordinary Americans invoked deep appeals to ethos during the discussion over Guantanamo Bay and other military prisons. This paper concludes by asserting that the unique American ethos represents one of the greatest assets the United States has as it moves forward. In a period where people view the United States as in decline, this paper suggests that the American ethos has the potential to reestablish America’s position on the world stage.

Posted by Stanford Global Leadership Class at 11:15 AM | Permalink | Comments (7)

Micheal Ortiz, Mike McGhie, and Steve Ziegler
Comprehensive Reflection on the Rhetoric of Leadership
March 9, 2009

Micheal Ortiz
Biography
Hello everyone, my name is Michael Ortiz and I am a sophomore planning to major in Computer Science and minor in Economics. Without a doubt, coming to Stanford is the best decision I have ever made. Stanford is a special place not only because it stimulates intellectual growth, but personal growth in general. I’m humbled by the achievements and passions of my peers and to even be considered a peer is an honor. What has perhaps struck me the most about Stanford culture is the dedication of its students to philanthropy.

This philanthropic influence combined with my interest in environmental economics prompted me to enter a start-up idea called Cap-and-Save into the Stanford Social Entrepreneurial Challenge. Cap-and-Save is a carbon offset project that uses a cap-and-trade model to provide economic incentives for individuals to lower their energy consumption and adopt clean energy. I have used this research project to immerse myself in the language of the field and to learn the proper rhetorical strategies to market my own cap-and-trade model.

Reflection
The European Union has implemented a cap-and-trade system, the most economically efficient carbon emissions reduction scheme, since 2005 in order to fight climate crisis. Meanwhile, the United States has done nothing. For my research, I analyzed the rhetoric of Stavros Dimas, European Commissioner for the Environment, to gain insight into what rhetorical strategies the United States could adopt to establish a cap-and-trade system. I found that Dimas was successful in implementing a cap-and-trade scheme, because he implemented four key rhetorical strategies: 1) urgent tone, 2) optimism, despite the urgency of climate crisis, 3) appeal to US leadership and 4) appeal to economic opportunity of cap-and-trade.

These four rhetorical strategies are successful because they speak to the audience. Knowing your audience is perhaps the most important indicator of successful rhetoric. I analyzed President Obama’s rhetoric in an address to a joint session of Congress to see where he could improve his rhetoric. I found that he successfully applied the first three factors to his rhetoric. However, Obama should know that his audience responds, sadly, above all, to one thing: money. If Obama is to swing public perception of cap-and-trade, he must speak to what the American people are willing to listen. He must emphasize, less eloquently and more clearly, the economic advantage, not sacrifice, of renewable energy and how cap-and-trade will help stimulate renewable growth. If Obama learns how to better speak to the American people, they will listen.
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Mike McGhie
Biography
Mike McGhie is sophomore majoring in Economics at Stanford University. His interests in the global community stems from his Jamaican and Japanese heritage as well as his experiences living in Japan, Germany, Holland, England, and the United States. In high school Michael used the internet to place students looking for internships and jobs with employers. Last summer, Michael combined his interests in technology and globalization to cofound a venture that sold websites to local businesses then outsourced the labor to Indians. Michael is currently conducting research for Arijit Sengupta, the CEO of BeyondCore, in the BPO industry through the Global Entrepreneurial Marketing class at Stanford. After Michael graduates, he hopes to tackle the problem of fully utilizing human capital all over the world as a business technology consultant or as an entrepreneur. In his free time, Mike plays rugby for Stanford, and loves to have philosophical conversations with friends and snack on wheat crackers after crazy nights of debauchery around campus ;-).

Reflection
Mike’s thoughts about the rhetoric of leadership: The research I did on the outsourcing industry gave me a lot of insight on how to get people to buy into your vision. I found that companies separated by cultural barriers and thousands of miles can still overcome these boundaries by building their ethos, creating rapport, and clearly communicating the benefits of their vision. So much of leadership has to do with clearly communicating the vision you have--and a person or organization's ability to do this will literally shape the world. My topic focused on an industry instead of an individual leader and was a lot narrower than a lot of the other topics, so I faced challenges in communicating how an entire industry could be seen as a leader and why my research was important to the class. During my presentation, I learned how to move my research beyond technical jargon into something that is meaningful and beneficial to the entire class. It's super cool how technology is allowing us to communicate over the internet with you guys. What do you think the world will look like 15 years from now when new technology and globalization have torn down many of the boundaries separating people from different countries?
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Steve Ziegler
Biography
My name is Steven Andrew Ziegler. I was born in Denver, Colorado and grew up in the suburb of Broomfield roughly twenty minutes north of downtown. I have a brother, Joe (24), two sisters, Sarah (26) and Anna (28), and two wonderful parents. I have been told I have an extremely dry sense of humor; I love sarcasm, and am typically easy to get along with because people interest me. Since I was ten years old I have aspired to be a professional golfer, and am currently following my dream through the footsteps of my idol, Tiger Woods, by playing golf here at Stanford. My dreams are to be able to make a kid’s day by simple interactions, i.e. giving a lesson, or inviting them under the ropes of an event. I aspire to make a difference in our youth: our future leaders.

Reflection
For this class, I decided to analyze the rhetoric of Tiger Woods and Andre Agassi’s educational foundations to see how these men have transferred success from their respective sports into making a positive difference in education. Throughout my research and with the help of my colleagues, I noticed two reoccurring themes in quality leader’s messages: empathy and gratitude.

So, it is not a leader’s superior determination, or intelligence, or talent that makes them influential. Effective leaders are exceptional communicators, and my experience in this class suggests that those who lead gain their audience’s attention and respect through empathy and gratitude. Think about any time someone has thanked or acknowledged you for your contribution, and how you receive that person afterwards. It may not always easy to be gracious, as author Nate Booth describes, “we tend to neglect the practice of gratitude because it involves an admission of our vulnerability and dependence on other people,” but wouldn’t it be nice to live in a world where cultural norms were founded on sharing respect for others?

I believe acknowledging others build teams, much stronger than the individual. Empathy and gratitude filled messages breed effective leaders that work to improve our society, like Woods and Agassi have done by directing attention to education. I too want to make a positive difference in the future generations of this world, and I feel this class has given me the tools to accomplish my dream.

We invite you to read our research further.
Sincerely,
Micheal Ortiz, Mike McGhie, and Steve Ziegler

Micheal Ortiz
The debate is over and the verdict is in: climate change is real, urgent and manmade. Scientists, economists, the European Union and George H.W. Bush have also agreed upon a solution: cap-and-trade. However, even in the face of opposition from most developed countries, George W. Bush neglected to act on climate change. Fortunately, a new page has been turned in American history and President Obama has made the environment a top priority. Although his rhetoric is a drastic improvement from the Bush administration, he still has a lot to learn from the European Union, specifically European Commissioner for the Environment Stavros Dimas, who helped implement the European Union Emissions Trading Scheme in 2005. This paper argues that President Obama can swing public opinion in favor of cap-and-trade by adopting Dimas’ rhetorical tools of urgency, optimism, leadership, and perhaps most relevant to Americans, an appeal to the economic opportunities available in clean energy.

Mike McGhie

Steve Ziegler
What makes an effective leader? This paper examines how Andre Agassi and Tiger Woods have established and managed their ethos to make a difference in education. Through my analysis, I have found that these two role models embody their rhetoric with two qualities: empathy and gratitude. In the paper, I study how each athlete has established and effectively managed their ethos through empathy and gratitude. To do so, I utilize the Andre Agassi Charitable Foundation and Tiger Woods Foundation’s mission statements, websites, and additional secondary sources from sportswriters Nate Booth and Kyle Kusz. I thank Professor Alyssa O’Brien and members of my PWR II Class for their valuable feedback on this project and for being the inspiration for my thesis. In an ever-expanding world, nothing can yield results better than empathetic and gracious guidance.

Posted by Stanford Global Leadership Class at 09:46 AM | Permalink | Comments (15) | TrackBacks (0)

Hi all!
I imagine this to be a global truth, but man do things suck right before finals! As the quarter draws to a close, we all become increasingly busy, and as such my poor group was unable to meet this weekend! But worry not; we wouldn't dare forget our dear friends in Khabarovsk and Örebro. I only insert this disclaimer to explain the format of the following entry. Rather than one large reflection, we have each written one independently, which means triple the fun! Pardon my giddy enthusiasm, by the way; I stayed up all night working on an assignment and a paper, so I'm tripping out a little bit. I digress. Without further ado, Kavita Shah!

--------------------------------------------------------

Hi everyone!
My name is Kavita Shah and I am a sophomore in the Stanford Global Leadership class. I thought that before I dive into the findings of my research project, I should tell you a little about my life at Stanford so as to give you some information about Stanford “culture.” I am majoring in International Relations and minoring in Spanish and in Modern Languages. As you may be able to tell, I love learning new languages. I studied Japanese in high school and am now in the process of taking my second year of Spanish at Stanford. I plan to study abroad in Madrid during the fall of the next school year. I am also interested in learning Arabic and plan to do so after this year of Spanish. Outside of academics, I am involved in the Stanford Cardinal Broadcasting Network, the Stanford band, and charity events through Pi Beta Phi, my sorority. I also used to work as an assistant personal trainer, and for the future, I hope to get more involved with the Stanford Film Society and Stanford in Government.
As for my research project, I wanted to investigate the fear of Islam that exists in the West through an analysis of the rhetoric concerning Islam and its followers in the Western mass media. I looked at various case studies such as well-known TV shows and movies like “24” and Aladdin. In these, I discussed the negative and predominantly violent stereotypes that are used to characterize Muslims and Middle Easterners. I then looked at news articles from which I found three main flaws with news reporting regarding the portrayal of Islam. The first of which was the confusion between religion and ethnicity. While most people are described by their region in the news (their city, state, or country if global news), Muslims are often described only by their religion. This puts Muslims in the news a lot more than Christians, for example, since an incident involving a Christian would not mention their religion in the reporting. The second flaw is a double standard that exists between the interpretation of actions by Muslims versus actions of non-Muslims. In my paper, I wrote about the Lebanese “kidnappings” of British and American “hostages” in 1991 and about the failure of the news to report that at the same time Lebanese were being in their own country by Israelis and that these people were referred to as “prisoners” and “inmates” while the British and Americans were “hostages.” Finally, I discussed the growing concept of “Green Peril,” the idea that Islam is a threat to the West because of the “clash of civilizations.” Because of the spread of this concept, Western readers will begin to wrongly believe that there is no way the Western world and the Islamic world can reconcile any differences. Thus, through my research I have found that the Western media has portrayed Islam, its followers, and predominantly Muslim regions like the Middle East in a negative light. It is imperative that they rectify this since movement in a positive direction between the West and the Islamic world is only possible if the people of both sides respect each other and since our perception of those on the other side of the globe is only possible through the media, it is the media’s responsibility to make sure the image they portray is accurate and honorable so as to act as a leader to the public and guide them in the right direction.
Reflecting on my personal rhetorical choices, I have learned to better utilize the power of ethos by incorporating my research sources and their ideas into my writing. By bringing these sources into my writing, I gain more credibility and can build on these ideas when I add my own insight. I also learned to better outline my paper in the beginning so as to give the reader a roadmap for where my paper is going and so they know what to expect. Finally, I learned the importance of concession because by acknowledging potential holes in my argument and then explaining why my argument is still strong makes my paper even more credible.
Through this research project, I have learned that the rhetoric of leadership, in addition to many other things, must be accurate and honest. Without this, one is not being a true leader because you are not giving people an informed background to make their own proper decisions.

Abstract:
What do you think of when you think of Islam? The West’s view of Islam, its followers, and the Muslim regions, in particular the Middle East, has been poorly shaped by the media. This paper argues that in the realms of popular culture and news/reporting media there exist fundamental flaws in the portrayal of Islam and that this is causing a negative Western perception of Islam. The paper illuminates the themes of violence and hatred of the West that are extremely prevalent when depicting Islam in popular culture and the three main flaws of how Islam is presented in news media. It ultimately suggests that there will be no reconciliation between the West and the Islamic world until the media acts as a leader to the public by providing them with an accurate and respectful image of the religion and its followers.

--------------------------------------------------------

Hi guys!
My name is Molly Spaeth and I am originally from Fargo, North Dakota. I am also a member of the Global Controversies and the Rhetoric of Leadership class. I LOVED this class, and it was so exciting at the end of the quarter to hear all of the presentations and how everyone’s research ideas had finally materialized. I think we grew as a class, and we also grew in our individual research strategies. Before I delve into my research, though, I want to explain a little bit more about myself. I’m a sophomore majoring in Communications with a minor in American History. On campus I am involved in Sophomore Class Cabinet and, like Kavita, I will be traveling abroad to Madrid next fall. I am in my second year of Spanish and also plan on taking Arabic upon my return to Stanford next fall.
Narrowing down my topic for my research paper was a long and arduous process. Initially I had wanted to investigate why the Nordic countries, such as Sweden and Norway, tended to give a larger percentage of their GDP to developing countries and welfare programs, whereas the United States gave a far smaller percentage. What I thought was most interesting about this was the fact that in the United States far more people say that they are religious than people do in the Nordic countries. Since then, my thesis changed about 8 times. But what I did eventually talk about was how US politicians have relied on the use of ‘God’s blessing’ as a rhetorical strategy, and most specifically, I focused in on the rhetoric of George W. Bush and Joe McCarthy. I showed how these two leaders, in a time of fear for domestic America, had relied and manipulated America’s devotion to God and religious values as justification for military or political action. In these two instances, the acts and initiatives initiated by these politicians actually served to be more detrimental to the same American values they were trying to protect: namely, freedom and democracy.
For my research, I read a book written by a colleague of my PWR professor named Brigitte Mral. in her book, she analyzed the rhetoric of George W. Bush after September 11th and highlighted some of his main themes in his speeches post-9/11. One thing that I thought was really interesting was the religious aspect of his speeches. Mral said that a reliance on religious rhetoric as an effective political tool would never work in countries like Sweden. In Sweden, referencing God would actually diminish a leader’s ethos, rather than enhance it. As a result of this, I the significance of my paper tried to tie in exactly how harmful it is to intertwine religion and matters of the state. I ended with an appeal to the legitimate recognition of the separation of church and state.
This paper was probably one of the most demanding I’ve ever written, but it was also the most rewarding. I learned so much from so many aspects of my research and it was an incredibly enriching experience. I learned how to better weave sources throughout my argument, and I also learned that I need to stick to a topic once I’ve found one. I often would research one thing and then go off on a tangent for the next 30 minutes, reading about topics I found interesting but which actually had no direct impact on my idea. The most significant part of my research has mostly confirmed my views as an agnostic. I came into this paper as an agnostic-by-default, but an agnostic that wanted to believe in God if He does exist. I am coming out of it battered and broken, disgusted at the horrors people have inflicted upon other people in the name of God. If there was a God, I just can’t imagine that He would let this happen. Through this project, I learned so much about the rhetoric of leadership and how the rhetoric of perhaps the greatest leader, God, has been exploited with adverse consequences.

Abstract:

This paper will examine the how the rhetoric of Joe McCarthy and George W. Bush, although successful in gaining support and implementing policy, actually served to further the interests of the two ‘threats’ during their reign and enabled the ‘threats’ to make a much more significant destruction to America than they would have been able to do on their own. Both McCarthy and Bush relied heavily on the use of religious rhetoric to appeal to a predominately religious American public. George W. Bush and McCarthy manipulated the American public’s desire to protect America in such a way that the desire to protect America actually hurt America. Because of this system, Bush and McCarthy enabled the ‘threats’ to do more damage than they could have without the rhetoric.

--------------------------------------------------------

Hey everyone!
My name is Jon Spivack, and as you can probably guess at this point, I, too am a sophomore in the Global Leadership class. I hail from San Francisco, California, and I love Stanford! Well, when I don’t have any papers or problem sets due. Or midterms. Hmm... Anyway, my interests include fencing, which I used to do varsity here, though I’m currently taking some time off, and jazz vibraphone, which, to be honest, I haven’t played in a couple years but miss dearly. Academically I’m at a bit of a crossroads, as I just realized that I hate chemistry (which was my intended major), but now I’m consider interdisciplinary studies in computer science. Whatever I pursue, I plan to minor in creative writing, as that has always been a passion of mine.
This class posed a unique challenge for me, as my love for writing notwithstanding, I absolutely despise reading. Nonsensical, I know. Nonetheless, when presented with the problem of researching a topic and then writing about it, I was quite frightened. Fortunately, I was able to find a topic I was interested in/passionate about, so when I finally did get down to it, the reading and requisite sleep deprivation wasn’t all that bad. I looked into women’s rights in America, with a focus on the proposed but unratified Equal Rights Amendment to our Constitution. Basically, a document was put before the people that would explicitly guarantee equality of the sexes if accepted into our fundamental code of law. The people said no. How messed up is that? So I looked into why. Speaking of women’s rights, though, what’s the situation in your countries? Here things are pretty decent, but true equality is still far away. Women make only about 3/4 of what men make on average, and they are greatly underrepresented in politics. On the bright side, though, things are moving forward. We came really close to our first female presidential candidate! I personally am hopeful for the future, though what I found in my research troubled me. The main problem over here is that about half the country, while not overtly sexist, believes that women and men are fundamentally different and should always occupy different roles in society. As long as we hold this belief, equality will never be reached. What do you guys think? Am I too presumptuous to assume that men and women are completely equal? Is equity a better goal than equality?
As for more general things I learned from this class, probably the point that sticks out to me most is the power of pathos in rhetoric. Whereas in an ideal world all that would matter would be the actual logical merit of one’s argument, in this highly imperfect world emotions sometimes speak to people much louder than reason. Side note: Hyperbole is my favorite thing in the world, so forgive me if I’m being too extreme. Anyway, in looking at some of the arguments made against the Equal Rights Amendment, I started to see how evoking things like fear and deeply rooted cultural values can make people forget completely about logic. My frustrations aside, this is an important thing to keep in mind when crafting one’s own rhetoric; content is not enough. Ethos and pathos can combine to transport the audience to a state of unquestioning nirvana. When presenting my research I tried to keep this in mind and make my words both engaging and appealing. I imagine the rhetorical appeal of emotion is a global phenomenon, but I must ask: are you guys as dumb as us Americans? In our politics it sometimes seems as if logic has gone out of fashion. What’s it like in your neighborhood?
Anyway, thanks for reading all this. Here’s the abstract from my paper.

Abstract:

Ever since John Adams famously ignored his wife’s request to “remember the ladies” in crafting the United States in 1776, the resultant nation has been a sexist one. For 62% of the country’s existence, women were denied the right to vote. Today, that right is ironically the only one for which women are given explicit constitutional equality. In 1923, a constitutional amendment was proposed that would guarantee women complete equality under the law. Congress passed it in 1972, but it fell three states short of ratification. This essay examines the history of the Equal Rights Amendment and the rhetoric that has surrounded it. Specifically, it focuses on the dichotomy between the belief that women and men deserve identical treatment and the belief that while women may not necessarily be inferior to men, the sexes are fundamentally different and ought to be treated as such. The essay concludes with a look at the current state of things and a call to action for the future.

Posted by Stanford Global Leadership Class at 09:29 AM | Permalink | Comments (16) | TrackBacks (0)

Hello! Our names are Crystal Espinosa, Atziry Gutierrez, and Bruce Hernandez. We are Stanford students and we just finished taking a class called Global Controversies and Practical Rhetoric for Leadership. The goal of this class was to strengthen our writing and to develop good presentation skill that we will be able to use the rest of our careers. We all lived in California prior to enrolling in Stanford. Our campus is located in the suburbs in between San Francisco and San Jose California. This makes our community a little secluded from the city life, but it creates the opportunity of a united community on campus. An awesome component about our community is its diversity. There are people from all different backgrounds, interests, and from all over the world, making Stanford an environment where we can all learn a little about the world from the comfort of our “home.”

[What we learned about Rhetoric]

One of the elements that were very important to our class was the tree rhetorical appeals:

1. logos, appeal to logic, “proof”;
2. pathos, emotional appeal, putting audience in an emotional state; and
3. Ethos, appeal to the speakers’ character.

In an interesting video conversation with students from Uppsala University in Sweden, we discussed how different cultures have different priorities on the use these three rhetorical appeals. In our conversation we found out that in Sweden people respond more to logos, whereas here in the United States we respond more to pathos. What is most persuasive in your culture, the appeal of logos, pathos, or ethos?
In class we also had the opportunity to engage in a video-conference with John Paval; who is a professional who works to prepare people to give effective presentations. One of the things he stressed was “All practice of oratory is the practice of putting meaning into action.” In the course we learned a lot about structuring presentations according to the addressed audience. This included fun skits, mimicking our professors to get a point across, and such activities. Our professor also had us practice voice projection, tone, body language, different styles of decorum, pace, and voice fluctuation. For example, during our voice projection activity, Dr. Alyssa O’Brien had half of the class stand outside while we watch practiced saying our name and favorite color out loud. If the student on the outside were able to hear us, those individuals practiced lowering their voice. One of our favorite class activities was forming groups of three or four and sharing our research ideas with our group members on a 40 to sixty second elevator ride. We called it the “elevator pitch. The goal for this activity was to condense our research topic to ten words, engaging the listener by intriguing them to ask a question about our research, and leaving them with the desire to learn more, all within that forty second elevator ride. If you were in this situation and you were telling us about your academic interests, what would your ten word elevator pitch be?

Rhetoric is an essential component of effective leadership. Both past and current leaders utilize the art of effective persuasion to address the problems that society has faced and express their visions, from social justice to product marketing.
Mike McGhee, one of our classmates, emphasized that no matter what your leadership role is, there are three things that are necessary for effective leadership:

1. Establish your ethos by gaining other’s trust

2. Communicate your vision effectively- that’s where practical rhetoric comes in

3. Emphasize the gains of following your vision; address the WHY

In the last quarter, we observed our peers utilize rhetoric effectively as leaders facing global issues, such as the AIDS epidemic, drug trafficking violence, indigenous inequality, global warming, job outsourcing, and education. Others researched the rhetoric of past leaders, such as Nelson Mandela, Barack Obama, Walt Disney, and Ronald Reagan.

To learn a little more about us, please click here:

Download file

These are our abstracts:

Crystal Espinosa

Title: The Virgin of Guadalupe: A paradox between the creation of Mexican national identity and the disparity and oppression of indigenous people

Abstract:
The Virgin of Guadalupe is a religious figure that has played a very important role in the development of Mexico’s religious unity and national identity. In the story of the miraculous appearance of the Virgin of Guadalupe, she appears to a poor indigenous man. This paper argues
that despite the Virgin of Guadalupe’s prominent role in Mexican society, indigenous people, who played an essential role in the story continue to be the poorest and most marginalized group in Mexico. This paper explores the paradox behind this concept and also argues that Mexico’s indigenous population has taken hold of this paradox and has decided to reclaim their place in society through the leadership that has emerged from their communities in the past twenty years.

Author’s Biography:
Crystal Espinosa is planning to double major in Anthropology and Spanish. She grew up in a rural area in northern California and predominately Mexican community. Daughter of Mexican immigrants, she spent a lot of time in Mexico visiting relatives. Her first has experiences observing the hardships in Mexico led her to become interested in current cultural issues that affect Mexico. Although she is unsure about what she wants to do after college, she is looking at the possibility of becoming a Latin American cultural studies or Spanish professor.

Atziry Gutierrez

Title: Mexico’s Ills: Calderon and El Narcotrafico

Abstract:
During the past decade, Mexico has experienced an alarming increase in violence and crimes related to the trafficking of illicit drugs, creating a threat to public safety and national security. The issue of drug trafficking and organized crime has been addressed by the past two presidents of Mexico, Ernesto Zedillo and Vicente Fox, and current president, Felipe Calderon, but unfortunately it has not been resolved. This paper argues that President Calderon has adopted the rhetoric of his predecessors and applied their themes; which include the rule of law, justice, security, and social responsibility, to his own rhetoric about the war on drug trafficking. Furthermore, this paper argues that the measures Calderon has taken to combat the drug cartels and criminality in Mexico are not original to him, thus proving that the Mexican President has failed to show any signs of innovation that would indicate a victorious government emergence against the war of against el narcotrafico, drug trafficking. .

About the Author:
Atziry Gutierrez is a sophomore majoring in International Relations with a focus in Latin America with a minor in Economics. She was born in the state of Michoacan, Mexico and moved to the Bay Area at the age of seven. She developed an interest in violence related to drug trafficking after she found out that her relatives in Mexico were receiving threats from a group of terrorist known as Los Zetas and who work for El Cartel del Golfo, one of Mexico’s largest drug cartels. This experience led her to initiate a research project on Mexico’s war on drug trafficking and develop a greater interest in international policies regarding the illicit activity. Gutierrez hopes to continue her research on the subject of drug trafficking and looks forward to becoming an international advisor in that field.

Bruce Hernandez

Abstract:
It is common for public opinion to believe that Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was a leader that advocated for social justice, and that social service through non-violence was the most important task King sought for America. Even though King did seek these previously mentioned actions, this research paper brings in new light that America is deceived. This paper argues that King developed a powerful strategy to fight systems such as segregation, poverty, and other social issues back then and even today. King’s strategy is composed of three different types of “love”: self-love, philos, and agape to appeal to the self, brotherhood, and social duty respectively. However, contrary to common belief that agape and social duty were advocated the most by King, this paper will make the point that through the actions of Martin Luther King, Jr. as well as his rhetoric, the most important tool that King had for fighting the systems of oppression was in fact Self-Love. That through self-love, King cared about individuals rather than masses, and wanted to develop strong confidence and leadership in every single one of his followers to have them enact the change that would eradicate these systems and transform the world.

Author’s Biography:
Bruce Hernandez is currently a sophomore at Stanford University who plans to major in Civil Engineering. Wanting to get involved in social activism later in his life, Hernandez believes it is of great importance to study and learn how past leaders have enacted change. This research has been a means for him to explore methods of how leaders perform change. Through this research, he has come to believe that people often underestimate themselves. That anyone has the power to enact change with the help of each others, but that people have low confidence to trust in themselves.

Do you have similar issues in your community? What do you think?

Posted by Stanford Global Leadership Class at 09:25 AM | Permalink | Comments (5) | TrackBacks (0)

Hi Everyone,

Thanks for your posts so far!! Our names are Angelina, Stephanie, and Mai. Our group all did similar rhetorical analysis of political leaders in relation to pertinent issues that affect their respective countries. Hope you enjoy!!

Examining the Rhetoric of Leaders
Reflections by Angelina Cardona, Stephanie Caro, and Mai El-Sadany

I am a sophomore at Stanford University studying International Relations with a minor in Urban Studies. I was a devoted volunteer to the Obama campaign during the 2008 Presidential Election; I knocked on doors, called undecided voters, put up flyers, registered voters, organized carpools, and traveled to four different states to help Obama win. From the first time I heard Obama speak in Reno in the spring of 2007, I was moved by Obama’s message and ability to connect with the audience. Since, I have developed deep passions for politics, public service, and human rights.
I chose to examine the rhetoric and tools Obama used throughout his successful campaign because I was intrigued that he used consistent rhetoric from country to country, never altering his message to fit varying cultural and societal norms and expectations. In my research, I questioned whether or not there were common themes that the people of world could rally around, especially in light of a world facing war, genocide, economic recession, an endangered environment, and poverty. Most importantly, I examined the implications of this rhetoric of global citizenship as to shed light on these tactics for future leaders/anyone with a vision to share to the world, and explore the effects of this positive and progressive rhetoric for international relations.
Working on this project, I realized the important of rhetoric as a catalyst to convey a message. In the first class session, Dr. O’Brien, “when you speak, realize that you are sharing a gift with the audience and that gift is the message you want to convey to them, so when you are up there do not feel nervous because the presentation is about your message.” Her words stuck to me throughout the quarter and empowered me to deliver my message to our class about my research but more importantly the message that was within Obama’s rhetoric—a call for service, of participation by all the citizens of the world, realizing that we all have a stake in one another. I feel blessed to be living in such a dynamic and changing time, and look forward to finding a career one day in public service and continuing to share my messages with the world.
- From Angelina

I began this research project when I was in the process of applying to study abroad in Madrid next year. As I began to craft what I imagined my experience to comprise of—learning the language, traveling throughout the country, experiencing student life in a different culture, living in the cultural and political hub of the country—I found myself wondering what niche of Spanish life I would become involved in. Taking this research opportunity to start learning about Spain here at Stanford, I began with my academic interest: politics. Because Spain is a relatively recent democracy (making its transition from dictatorship in the 1970s), I used Spain as a case study for the use of rhetoric, specifically ethos, by leaders of post-conflict countries. Spain became an increasingly interesting case because you see the way in which rhetoric surrounding their amnesty policy shaped a culture of silence and forgetting.
A lot like Angelina and Mai’s research projects, you see the way that the rhetoric of leaders has profound cultural consequences for their audience and in our cases, an entire nation. However, one lesson that my research and especially the dynamic of our class have taught me is that the relationship between the speaker and audience is not one way. Establishing one’s ethos is very much dictated by the audience—the cultural or socioeconomic background, historical experience, or personal biases—because legitimacy and goodwill is redefined with each culture or time period. At the same time, a leader who bends too much to the perceived will or sentiment of an audience, loses legitimacy, this applies especially to new democracies. I think the way to strike a balance between these two is to really understand why you believe in the opinions you’re presenting your audience. For me, this understanding came through a long process of critical thinking, really allowing the research to inform my opinion. The research projects that stood out the most to me were ones in which I felt the speaker’s objective stance in the beginning strengthened his or her persuasive argument in the end—a process of discovery. What this meant for my research, was challenging the typical “good guy” “bad guy” template of human rights cases and mastering the intricacies of Spain’s policies at the time.
- From Stephanie

As someone who grew up in the United States but was born in Egypt and to two very Egyptian parents, I was raised to appreciate all the aspects of my culture and background, whether the Egyptian, the Muslim, or the American. This open-mindedness has led to my interest in human rights, hates crimes, diversity and more. My research project stems from the urge to make sure that our leaders use culturally sensitive and respectful rhetoric that further the unification of the people of the world. I decided to study the effect of Bush’s post-9/11 rhetoric on the negative perception of Muslims and Islam by Americans.
Working on this project, I realized the importance of being passionate about what you study. In addition to that important lesson, I learned a lot of tips about effective rhetoric. Having usually conducted research using books, I let myself out of my comfort zone this time and ended up analyzing speeches, YouTube comments, blogs, videos, and even interviews. This variety of multimedia and material allowed me to be exposed to a number of sources and also provided for excellent engagement with my audience. When speaking, I also realized the importance of taking breaths in between my statements to let the audience comprehend what I was saying and also, to force myself to go slower, which would eventually lead to more eye contact with the audience. I’m still working on this, but at least this opportunity gave me chances to work on my weaknesses and go from there. Additionally, I learned how distracting and how beneficial hands can be. When I played with my scarf, I distracted the audience- but when I used my hands for certain motions to get a point across, they were often quite useful. Finally, I also learned the importance of balancing the use of facts and statistics to build my ethos, while also inserting colorful anecdotes and personal accounts to increase my pathos. Effective rhetoric balances these two and gets a strong message across.
- From Mai

We would love to hear all about your experiences with research, what global issues are you passionate about? Please comment on our blog and let us know what you've been working on and what you think of our projects.

Project Abstracts

Angelina’s Project Abstract
Obama’s unlikely story to the presidency is one that reaffirms the idea of the American Dream. His campaign became a movement involving millions of people volunteering their time and giving as little as $5 donations. But these hours and dollars added up to the largest grass-roots campaign as well as the most money raised in U.S. history for a presidential campaign. But how did he do it? How did Obama get so many people to rally around him, especially in the shadow of the most disapproved of U.S. President, George W. Bush? In my research, I analyze the universal themes Obama used to gain support and win, as well as the implications of this new wave of rhetoric that not only speaks to and addresses the American people but to the people of the world, and I argue the necessity of this rhetoric in rebuilding our world.

Stephanie’s Project Abstract (“Leadership after Conflict: Spain’s Rhetoric of Amnesia)
This essay considers the role of rhetoric, specifically ethos, or personal character, in the leadership of post-conflict nations. It focuses specifically on the Spanish government’s policy of political amnesty following the death of dictator Francisco Franco in 1975 and during its transition into democracy. This essay analyzes ethos in two forms. 1) The dynamic between the leader and his or her audience, showing that the rhetoric of amnesia appealed to the public by guaranteeing security above all, a break from the past, and negotiating with right-wing incumbents. 2) The maintenance of broader democratic principles, demonstrating that the Spanish government’s rhetoric of amnesia failed to uphold values of transparency, accountability, and justice. Using a framework of transitional justice, this essay argues that the Spanish government’s inability to establish legitimacy in the latter severely compromised its ethos as a democratic leader.

Mai’s Project Abstract (“At War with Islamic Fascists”: The Rhetoric of “Global Terror” As Presented by President George W. Bush in a Post-9/11 World)
The leadership position of the President of the United States has been a historically influential and extremely significant role. Whatever the President says often becomes a source of guidance for U.S. citizens and a gauge of the views and opinions of the American people to international observers, even if inaccurate. Because of Bush’s slanted War on Terror rhetoric and the historical influence of his role, this paper examines the relationship between his post-9/11 War on Terror rhetoric and the clear negative perception of Muslims that exists by Americans today, as confirmed by a 2006 CBS news poll. Due to the rhetorical effectiveness of repetition, this paper will focus on three repeated themes within Bush’s post-9/11 speeches. Throughout the examples, the paper stresses the persuasive quality and rhetorical effectiveness of the former President’s words and the situations that encouraged their general acceptance by the American people, despite the fact that in mostly any other scenario, they would have been regarded as hate speech. The paper then discusses the importance and significance of presidential rhetoric through a comparison of Bush’s rhetoric on “radical Islam” with President Barack Obama’s speeches in which he speaks directly to the Muslim world with respect and engagement. Through the varied responses to Bush and Obama’s rhetoric globally, the paper concludes with the ultimatum that presidents and political leaders around the world must realize the power of their words and the serious social and political implications that their rhetoric holds for both their citizens and the greater global community.

Posted by Stanford Global Leadership Class at 09:17 AM | Permalink | Comments (9) | TrackBacks (0)

Hi, everyone! So great to be posting on this blog and get introduced to students from all around the world. We are a group of sophomores taking a “Writing and Rhetoric” course on global controversies and practical rhetoric for leadership at Stanford University in Palo Alto, California, USA.

Our group has three members. The first member of our group, Shrestha Chowdhury, is a student from New Delhi, India. She just completed her research paper on female leadership in the Indian subcontinent with Prime Minister Indira Gandhi as the main subject of her research. She is excited that her research will help inspire her to become a leader some day, and thrilled about the insights her research has given her about the politics of the Indian subcontinent!

The second member of our group, Fidel Hernandez, is from Miami, Florida. He just completed his research on Walt Disney and his use of creative and motivational rhetoric to inspire childlike qualities of boldness, curiosity, playfulness, and innocence within society. He hopes that his research will demonstrate the enduring value of creativity in effective leaders.

The third member of our group, Matt Cook, is from Los Angeles, California. He completed his research on the humor of Ronald Reagan. In his paper he wrote about the ways in which Ronald Reagan used humor as a rhetorical tool to charm media, disarm adversaries, inspire optimism, and gain a following among people of multiple parties.

We are very proud to be a part of the Stanford community and hope to learn about other universities and cultures throughout the world. Here at Stanford, there is a big focus on entrepreneurship and initiative, which drives people of all majors to be active in doing what is practical. Instruction supplements theory with a heavy emphasis on practical application. Something else that defines Stanford is the emphasis on individuality. Rather than feeling like a “collective,” we celebrate the diversity, differences, and cultural roots of every single student. Something that demonstrates this is our band. Rather than having a band that marches around all wearing the same uniform and walking to the same beat (as our rival, University of California at Berkeley, does), our band members all wear something different! Every member is unique and individualistic. We love this attitude. Go Cardinal!

We’d love to hear about school spirit at your universities. How do students demonstrate school pride? Are sports games exciting? Also, with regards to academics, are you more theoretically oriented or practically oriented?

Thanks to everyone for sharing your thoughts. We’ve had fun on this blog!

Best wishes,

Shre, Fidel, and Matt

Here are the abstracts for the research we've been doing:

SHRE'S ABSTRACT:
Indian Prime Minister Indira Gandhi was one of the most notable female leaders of the 20th century. This paper analyses the effectiveness of Indira’s rhetoric as a case study of female leadership in the Indian sub-continent. Indira’s strategic use of her family’s political legacy in her rhetoric played an important role in her election to office and public appeal. Through her rhetoric and persona, Indira portrayed strength and resilience characteristic of stereotypical males to gain public acceptance in a patriarchal society like India. Indira also portrayed herself as “Mother India” and strategically used Indian society’s reverence for the strength of mothers to her advantage. The paper ultimately analyzes the effects of a large part of Indira’s political rhetoric being built on societal, cultural and religious aspects relevant only to Indian society, from a broader context.

FIDEL'S ABSTRACT:
For the sake of “growing up,” society encourages individuals to abandon childhood freedom as one develops towards adulthood. People are told they must ignore the inner child in order to effectively handle societal issues involving school, finances, family, and responsibility. This research paper, however, argues Walt Disney used rhetoric, theme parks, and personal experiences to illustrate the importance of a childlike mindset for effective, creative leadership. His message addressed historical shifts in societal priorities in which society lost youthful spirit and gave way to more pessimistic, stagnant, and distrustful outlooks on life. Walt Disney utilized his words and creations to revive America’s childlike nature, arguing effective leadership was grounded on four important juvenile qualities society once celebrated: boldness, curiosity, playfulness, and innocence. Through use of rhetoric that reminded America of their adventurousness during Manifest Destiny, the power of curiosity in developing revolutionary ideas, the playfulness of the Jazz Age, and the role of childlike innocence in fostering multicultural unity, Walt Disney argued that possibilities were limitless with the childlike tools to control their destiny, embrace the future, and fulfill their dreams.

MATT'S ABSTRACT:
Ordinarily people think of the United States Presidency as an intense office, especially in a time like the 1980s when the Cold War, economic recession, Challenger explosion, and other forces carried negative weight. Ronald Reagan found an effective way to incorporate humor into his rhetoric nonetheless. Reagan’s cinematic experience may have given him the experience he needed to use rhetoric effectively in shaping the character of the U.S. Reagan’s comedy, primarily apparent in speeches and debates, served as an effective rhetorical tool in four main ways: disarming political detractors and critical mainstream media, inspiring optimism in dire times, emphasizing exigency of message by intentional omission of comedy or adjusting levels of humor depending on time and place (comedic kairos), and appealing to people of all political parties. Reagan’s use of humor contributed to his earning the term “Great Communicator” during his quest for a moral revolution in America.

Posted by Stanford Global Leadership Class at 09:15 AM | Permalink | Comments (18) | TrackBacks (0)

Gaby, Kiah, Jaili, and Josie

Prostitution, while illegal, is still very common in the United States. However, in the popular perception of prostitution in the U.S. the woman is the prostitute while the man solicits her services. The reversal of roles mentioned in the Dahab article is fascinating in that heterosexual male prostitution is very uncommon in the U.S. Is male prostitution common or at least not strange in Egypt? Why do you suppose that is?

In the expected prostitution relationship, the female assumes the inferior position of a woman and a prostitute. However, in Dahab, prostitutes would appear to be under the financial control of the tourist. At the same time, males in most societies, including Egypt, hold a higher position of power. Who holds the power in the relationship between an Egyptian male prostitute and a foreign female tourist?

What kind of impression does this make on tourists and Egyptian locals? Although Western tourists are likely used to the idea of seeing women in positions of power, the idea of a woman wielding significant influence on a man is not a common one in other countries. As is the case in Egypt, there is a strong attempt to prevent any change in the balance of power between the sexes, but the emphasis is on curbing the activities of the male Egyptian, not the female tourist. Clearly, while Egyptians want to maintain the image of the dominant male, they are still cautious about explicitly restricting tourist activities.

In America, police enforcement of laws against prostitution seems to target the prostitutes themselves and rarely ever punishes the “Johns” that create the market for prostitution.

Do you see that there is a big gender gap in the enforcement of male prostitution versus female prostitution or the way couples who consist of a Egyptian male and a foreign women are arraigned more? If this is the case, is this prevalent and obvious or is it hidden and does it go unnoticed? Is there a difference between the city and rural areas or between Dahab and other cities?

Posted by Julia Bleakney, Stanford University at 10:33 AM | Permalink | Comments (26) | TrackBacks (0)

By: Nikolas, Kevin, Aurora, Kiah, Mercedes and Keshav

Source: http://www.traveladventures.org/continents/africa/pyramids3.shtml

Egypt, especially Cairo, provides a healthy mix of the ancient and modern. With its bustling city life, state of the art opera house, and luxurious western hotels and shopping, Cairo seems no different from any western metropolis. However, the city also houses 14th century Khan el-Khalili bazaar, monuments, and a famous antiquity museum. Most importantly, a stones throw away lie the great pyramids.

From Egyptian tourism websites, we were able to construct the way Egypt portrayed itself. This identity focused on the ancient civilizations and exotic geographical destinations such as wonderful beaches and beautiful diving. We found it interesting that the website emphasized sustainable environment, specifically eco-tourism. It appeared to us that they were selling this idea to attract tourists to Egypt. After watching a tv commercial, it really made us want to travel to Egypt and experience the ancient civilizations, beautiful beaches, and be part of a unique culture.

When we think about Egyptian image in general, without any specific research, we essentially think of Ancient Egypt and related sites – such as the Pyramids, the Sphinx, the Nile, Alexandria and the Pharaohs. We acknowledge that this is a very stereotyped understanding of Egypt. The country seems to strive for also portraying additional images – looking at Egyptian tourism websites, we see that the Egyptian tourism experience is also described as modern – activities such as diving, safari tours and cruises are advertised.

Our question would be: besides the commonplace Egyptian tourist sites, what Egyptian attractions do you guys think that is well portrayed (at least should be) by your country? I am sure that you have a variety of tourist sites besides the Pyramids that are popular within the country – which may give the impression that they are popular outside Egypt as well. We want to know your opinions about how you see the image Egypt is portraying of itself.

Posted by Julia Bleakney, Stanford University at 09:36 AM | Permalink | Comments (12) | TrackBacks (0)

Hello everybody in Khavaborsk, and thank you for your very interesting questions and answers and comments on our latest entry! We enjoyed reading about your country very much and would like to know more.

A little bit of Group 4 (G4)

We are at the moment sitting on the top floor in one of the many houses on campus and looking out on all the snow, waiting for spring and the birds to return. Our winter this year is extremely snowy and cold and we can't do much more than stay inside and watch tv. One of the biggest television events in Sweden is the "Melodifestivalen", that is our competition when we decide who will compete for Sweden in the Eurovision song contest. We have several semifinals and it is a long process that goes on for about two months, and more than a quarter of our population watches the show. It is very democratic and we all have to call in and vote several times.

We, personally, are not very big fans of the event, but in Sweden it is impossible to avoid it, everybody always knows who won every semifinal and who qualifies to the next level. It is a media feast! If you would like to more about this strange phenomena you can check out this web page http://svt.se/melodifestivalen/. How big is Eurovision song contest in Russia? Do you vote or do you have a jury that decides for you?

We thought we would write a little bit about this because many of your questions for us was about Swedish music. Many of the artists that compete in the Melodifestivalen are popular contemporary artists, but we have our own favorites in other genres aswell.

Alisa, you asked for some Swedish artists. As for Abba and Roxette, we listened to them 15 years ago or when we are very drunk, but we love them anyway, as classics:) Some of our favorite contemporary artists are Sahara Hotnights, Lykke Li, Melody Club, Lazee, Markus Krunegård (he sings in swedish), Robyn and of course many more. As for the rock music, Gleb, we recommend Hellacopters and Sabaton, or if you like heavy rock Hannes recommend In flames, Arch enemy, Meshuggah, Falconer and Burst.
The most famous band from Örebro is Millencollin, a great punk band.

You also had som othe questions we thought we would answer. The most difficult question, we thought, was Alisas question about why the corruption level in Sweden is so low. Maybe it's because our society is so open and without censorship, and all information is so easily accessible. All information regarding authorities can be accessed by anyone and the media is very liberal and independent, at least if you compare with most other countries.

We also saw your pictures, Alisa, and they were very nice. It would be great if all of you posted more pictures, we would love to see what you look like!

Nadia, you asked about which sports are big in Sweden, and we assume it's about the same as in Russia. A lot of soccer, ice hockey, skiing in the winter, motor sports, track and fields...
You told us that your part of Russia is very much influenced by Chinese and Japanese culture, in what way? Clothes? Food? Arts? Is the laguage differend in east Russia? Is it difficult to understand the people that live in the western parts?

We would love to hear more from you soon!

Unfortunately Bengt is not here today, he was probably up all night watching House MD, and Ronald is at a meeting with his union, so here's another picture of us that are here writing today, playing with Photobooth!

Best wishes from David, Maria and Hannes in G4!

Posted by Orebro Intercultural Rhetoric Class, Sweden at 03:47 AM | Permalink | Comments (14) | TrackBacks (0)

By: Crowley, Colin, Chrissy, Katherine, Kasey

When first asked, “what are your initial stereotypical perspectives of Egypt?” our class responded with a slur of clichéd images, ones that are formed through the media, museums, schooling, and places like Las Vegas. Immediately images of pyramids, camels, a dry and arid climate, the Nile River, Cleopatra, pharaohs and King Tut, mummies, and the Ten Plagues of Egypt came to mind – all of these images contrived due to present-day American culture.

Museums:
For Americans, much of our first hand interaction with true Egyptian history comes from visits to natural history museums. It seems that nearly every museum in America has a portion of it devoted to Egyptian history. As a kid I remember going to the museum and, at the entrance, passing by the scale model of the pyramids of Giza you would then enter the mummy exhibit. While this was just a very small taste of Egypt's rich history, the allure of ancient Egypt was being instilled at a young age.

Media:
Through music, film, and television, the mass force of American media has instilled a stereotypical understanding of Egyptian culture in American society. Songs like the Bangle’s ‘Walk like an Egyptian,’ and Everclear’s ‘High Above Me,’ condense the rich Egyptian culture into superficial mentions of hookah pipes, bazaars, and Cleopatra. Films like ‘The Mummy’ (and both of its sequels) use clichéd images of pyramids, sand dunes, camels, and golden tombs to represent all of Egypt. Another way Egypt is portrayed in popular culture in the US is through the Luxor hotel in Las Vegas, Nevada; the hotel, pyramid-shaped and guarded by a recreation of the Great Sphinx of Giza, boasts that visitors can experience the exotic atmosphere of genuine Egypt. Because the media is such a powerful tool in shaping the Americans’ knowledge, appreciation, and understanding of culture, the stereotypical and often inaccurate images that the media presents are often accepted as fact.

School:
The basic geography and history that we are taught in elementary school give us an oversimplified idea of what defines Egypt. We are taught to perceive Egypt as an extensive desert broken up only by the great pyramids of ancient times and the longest river in the world, the Nile. When we think of Egyptian royalty, we think King Tut and Cleopatra, and when we think of Egyptian mode of transportation, we think camels. These historical and simplified characterizations do not give the whole story of modern day Egypt, yet they stay burned into our minds because of what our elementary schooling has taught us to believe.

Posted by Julia Bleakney, Stanford University at 09:35 AM | Permalink | Comments (5)