Public
Speaking Home PagePublic
Speaking Home Page
Supporting
materials are the basic building blocks of speeches. You simply cannot
have an effective speech without substance. Supporting materials provide
that substance. Whether you are informing an audience about last month's
sales figures, persuading them to support a piece of legislation, or giving
a toast at your friend's wedding, you must build your speech around well
chosen supporting materials. There are several kinds of supporting materials
that you might choose to use in your speeches. You should use several different
kinds in the same speech. This page discusses the various kinds of supporting
materials and offers some suggestions for using them effectively. Remember,
well chosen, carefully researched, and strategically placed, supporting
materials form the back bone of effective speeches. There are three kinds
of supporting materials discussed here:
Initially, there are two concerns you should have when using supporting materials. First, each piece of supporting material should be relevant to the point you are making in your speech. Just because you have a really good quotation, or some shocking statistic, doesn't mean that it is relevant to the point you are trying to make. Using irrelevant supporting materials just to use them only confuses the audience and hampers your ability to effectively communicate your message. Second, supporting materials should not stand alone. They are supporting materials, not self contained parts of your speech. As such, they should be used to support your message -- not be your message.
Examples are the main tools that speakers useto clarify their ideas. A liberal use of revealing and enlightening examples is absolutely crucial for enhancing your audience's understanding of your message. You may think of examples as falling into three different categories: brief examples, lengthy examples, and hypothetical examples. The nature of your material, the time that you have to give your speech, and the importance of the point you are making should serve as guides in making your decision about which kind of example you will use in your speech.
A brief example is an example used by a speaker to quickly illustrate a point. For example, if you are giving a speech on environmental degradation, you might list quickly several different ways in which the environment is currently being destroyed. You might say something like this: "The future of our environment is faced with a dire forecast. Wherever you look these days, the symptoms of environmental degradation are rampant. From the rain forests in the tropics, the lakes, rivers, and streams in our own state to the brownfields that lie under former industrial sites and the atmosphere around us, signs of humanity's toxic mark are everywhere."
In this passage, several brief examples are strung together to support the claim that environmental decay is everywhere. It should be pointed out, however, that the effectiveness of this example depends on the audience's ability to understand and identify with each of the examples chosen. If, they do not know what a brownfield is, the utility of this particular example should be reconsidered. Brief examples, are just that -- brief. Their effectiveness depends upon the audience's ability to recognize quickly the support or clarity the example provides to the point in he speech.
A lengthy example is an example used when a speaker's point is so complex, it requires considerable explanation and expansion. Suppose you are giving a speech on the regulation of illicit material on the internet. To develop your contention that the internet is riddled with such materials, and that they are easily accessible, you would have to go into some detail about the extent and availability of such materials. In this case, your example(s) would take more time to present and would need to be developed more carefully. To persuade your audience that substantial First Amendment curtailments are necessary, each example would need to offer a horrifying picture of the dangers lurking within the reach of any browser.
A third kind of example is the hypothetical example. This type of example differs from either a brief example or a lengthy example insofar as its content is speculative or hypothetical. While it can take the form of either a brief or a lengthy example, a hypothetical example is not grounded in reality -- at least not yet. One of the reasons you may want to use a hypothetical is that you want the audience to imagine what might happen. You are asking the audience to participate in your speculative "what if". What if nothing is done to halt environmental degradation? What if nothing is done to regulate illicit material on the internet? In either of these cases, your hypothetical example would describe the world of the future -- a world that might be preventable if your course of action is adopted -- a world that is sure to arrive if nothing is done.
As a speaker, you need to be cautious when using hypothetical examples. In either of the two examples we have discussed here, you ca not engage in mere idle speculation about what will happen in the future. Instead, your hypothetical examples need to be chosen judiciously, based upon your best estimate of what is likely to happen.
One of the ways you might combine each of these kinds of examples into the same speech is illustrated by a recent speech by Representative Rohrbacher (R- California). [To examine the speech go to the Congressional Record and look at the "Special Order Speeches" for April 14, 1997.] In a speech on the dangers of patent reform, the Congressman began his speech by offering a lengthy description of a bouquet of flowers. Hidden in this bouquet are snakes that are not immediately apparent, but lurk, waiting for the opportunity to strike. He likened this to the patent reform legislation before the Congress -- it appears beautiful, but there are dangerous provisions hidden inside. As the speech continued and he discussed each of these provisions, he returned to the bouquet of flowers, announcing that the venomous snake will strike when we least expect it. In this case, the metaphorical bouquet provided an entry point for an example that was at first lengthy, later on brief, and hypothetical throughout.
The most important rule of thumb when using examples is to choose them well and plan them in advance. You should not plan on coming up with examples "off the cuff" while giving your speech. Such an approach inevitably confuses the audience and frequently leaves trying to figure out how to explain yourself mid-speech. Instead, you should plan each example for maximum impact. Examples are the key to unlocking your message. If your examples fail, your message will fail.
Statistics are perhaps the most influential factor in decision making. When the Federal Reserve Board deliberates over whether to raise interest rates, it uses statistics. When corporations downsize, they rely on statistics. When legislators vote on a carbon tax to curtail carbon dioxide emissions, they use statistics. In each of these cases, statistics are the critical elements of important decisions. Not only can these numbers be important for making decisions, they also are used justas often in justifying them.
You should be familiar with two kinds of statistics: descriptive statistics and inferential statistics. Descriptive statistics indicate the magnitude of events. The following are all examples: "There are 1500 student in the freshman class;" "Sales of the new video game were up 50% last month;" and "The pitcher's ERA is 3.2". They describe the magnitude of certain events.
In contrast, inferential statistics are statistics used to demonstrate trends, so as to offer projections. Examples of statements that rely on inferential statistics might include: "Enrollment is projected to grow by 10% over the next few years;" "Video game sales will fall during the first quarter of the year," and "The pitcher's ERA of 5.6 will continue to drop as the summer wears on." In these cases, statistics are used to suggest trends so that decisions can be made based upon the trends inferred. So, whether it's a baby boom, a post holiday sales drop, or an old arm warming up for a pennant race, inferential statistics provide useful information for predicting what will happen in the future. It is important to keep in mind that such statistics are never foolproof and reliance upon them is never fail-safe. There may be any number of unexpected or unforeseen events that can arise to stifle your projection.
When you use statistics in a speech you assume responsibility for the accuracy and applicability of those statistics. In many ways, numbers can and do lie. How we come up with those numbers and interpret them is what tips the balance. If you use statistics in your speech, you should be comfortable with the methodological considerations that went into generating them. For example, was the sample size sufficiently large and representative of the population? In this regard, you also need to consider the source of the statistics. Would you rely on data from the tobacco industry to count as statistical evidence in a speech on the health risks related to smoking? Finally, you need to consider whether the statistics accurately describe what you say they describe. If, for example, you give a speech on how the weather is great in Washington, DC, and you use statistical evidence such as the average annual temperature to support your claim, you need to consider whether or not this statistic reliably describes the weather. If the average annual temperature is a balmy 76 degrees, does this accurately describe the 98 degree summers and below zero winters?
Testimony involves utilizing the words and opinions of others to support your message. Incorporating testimony into your speech is a tremendous way to increase your ethos as a speaker, and it is an important aspect of establishing the persuasiveness of your message. You should be familiar with three kinds of testimony: lay, prestige and expert.
Lay testimony is testimony from the "person on the street". It is testimony from someone whom your audience can identify with, because they share the same, values, beliefs and experiences as the person you are calling upon. In a speech urging support for spending public funds to finance the construction of an athletic facility for a sports franchise, you might use lay testimony to demonstrate that there is support among the tax payers for using revenue in this way.
Prestige testimony is testimony from a person who is famous or otherwise easily recognized by the audience. When you use prestige testimony, you are drawing upon that person's stature to lend credibility, authenticity, and recognition to your message. For example, if you are giving a speech on the environment, you might want to call upon Robert Redford. A well known actor, Redford has been active in the environmental movement for many years. While he is not an expert, he is someone who is recognized easily by the audience as someone with well established opinions on the need to enhance environmental protection.
Expert testimony is testimony from someone whose area of expertise relates directly to the issues discussed in your speech. By using expert testimony, you incorporate the expert's expertise into your speech. This type of testimony can be incredibly valuable when you are speaking on controversial subjects. It is not just you who supports your cause, but also someone who has given considerable thought and study to the issue.
In his famous "Checker's Speech" , President Nixon powerfully used testimony to support his claim that he did not profit personally from campaign funds. He said:
Some of you may say, "Well, that's all right Senator; that's your explanation, but have you got any proof?" And I'd like to tell you this evening that just about an hour ago we received an independent audit of this entire fund. I suggested to Gov. Sherman Adams, who is the chief of staff of the Dwight Eisenhower campaign, that an independent audit and legal report be obtained. And I have that audit here in my hand.
It's an audit made by the Price, Waterhouse & Co. firm, and the legal opinion by Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher, lawyers in Los Angeles, the biggest law firm and incidentally one of the best ones in Los Angeles. . . . And I'd like to read to you the opinion that was prepared by Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher and based on all the pertinent laws and statutes, together with the audit report prepared by the certified public accountants.
It is our conclusion that Senator Nixon did not obtain any financial gain from the collection and disbursement of the fund by Dana Smith; that Senator Nixon did not violate any Federal or state law by reason of the operation of the fund, and that neither the portion of the fund paid by Dana Smith directly to third persons nor the portion paid to Senator Nixon to reimburse him for designated office expenses constituted income to the Senator which was either reportable or taxable as income under applicable tax laws.
Now that, my friends, is not Nixon speaking, but that's an independent audit which was requested because I want the American people to know all the facts, and I'm not afraid to have independent people go in and check the facts, and that is exactly what they did.
Whatever we may think of Nixon and this speech, it is unquestionably the case that his use of the testimony of the law firm was a powerfully persuasive moment. By emphasizing the qualifications of the firm, the importance of an independent opinion, and then reading its conclusion, Nixon successfully used testimony to blunt the charges against him.
As Nixon's speech demonstrates, it is especially important when using expert testimony to consider the qualifications of the authority. In this respect, several questions might serve as guides: Who are they? What do they do? What makes them experts on this topic? How are they regarded in their field? Do they have any predispositions? From what organizational or institutional body do they hail? Each of these question is important and merits considerable attention when you are deciding which expert(s) to include in your speech. Here, it is important to recall a scene played out in the nation's courtrooms every day. For every expert the prosecution calls, the defense can find an equally well established expert to refute them. As the court room aptly demonstrates, expertise does not mean truth.
Public
Speaking Home Page