Raising Mispat

1

Abstract This thesis used generative criticism to deduce the rhetorical tools that were used by successful, mass movements rhetoricians before the popularization of the internet. A framework that can be referenced by future mass movement rhetoricians was derived from Lincolnʼs Last Public Address and Mandelaʼs Speech on His Release From Prison. These two artifacts were coded to see which behavioral communication models or theories best fit the genre of mass movements. Aspects from Eric Hofferʼs The True Believer, the Elaboration Likelihood Model, and Agenda-Setting Theory dominated the pre-web artifacts. Therefore, units of analysis from each theory were compiled to form The Mass Mobilization Framework (MMF). This framework was then applied to Kony 2012– a web-based advocacy documentary which set the record for the

fastest growing video online (Wilson, 2012). This documentary reveals that the effectiveness of the MMF increases through the medium of the internet. When the internet is paired with the MMF, the audience is more likely to act and their action influences other agendas with increased speed.

Keywords: Lincoln, Mandela, Invisible Children, Social Activism, Media, Persuasion, Mass Mobilization Framework

2

Chapter 1: The Bible, Quintilian, and Persuasive Mišpāṭ

3

In any situation, the rhetor is given many available means of persuasion. He or she can either react to a scene or transform a scene. However, no rhetorical act ever occurs in a vacuum. Rather, each act is a reaction to a preceding occurrence or an immediate crisis. Rhetoric is synonymous to activism in the sense that rhetoric involves using language to counter something that is not as it should be. Through rhetoric, what is may become closer to what ought to be “by bringing into existence a discourse of such a character that the audience, in thought and action, is so engaged that it becomes a mediator of change” (Bitzer, 1968, p.5).

In Micah 6:8, are instructed to make things that are not as the ought to be into what they should be. The verse reads as follows: " " "

Mankind, He has told you what is good and what it is the Lord requires of you: to act justly, to love faithfulness, and to walk humbly with your God (Micah 6:8, HCSB) When the prophet Micah delivers the message, he instructs the

Israelites, who had been offering God lofty sacrifices of worship, that this is not Godʼs desire. Rather, God desires that his people “act justly.” This command is translated from the word mišpāṭ which “refers to the restoration of a situation or environment which promoted equity and harmony (šālôm) in a community” (D. N. Freedman, G. A. Herion, G. A. Graf David F., J. D. Pleins & A. B. Beck (Eds.), 1992, p.1128). Thus, God desires that humanity act to

4

restore things to equality and harmony. This is the goal of all three rhetors analyzed in this thesis.

The more reality is in need of alteration, the greater the mode of rhetoric must be. As Quintillian intriguingly states, greater achievements are the result of greater effort : " " " " "

It is an ordinance of nature that nothing great can be achieved in a moment, and that all the fairest tasks are attended with difficulty, while on births as well she has imposed this law, that the larger the animal, the longer should be the period of gestation (Quintillian, 1922, p.93).

“Raising Mišpāṭ” identifies how a rhetor achieves great social

advancement through rhetoric by identifying rhetorical devices used pre-web and looking at how the internet increases the effectiveness of these tools. Both the on and offline rhetoric takes time. However, time is relative. In a world where a it takes four weeks for an LA newspaper to reach New York, a few years may have seemed like a short period of time. However, in the microwave culture of the twenty-first century a year may seem like an extensive amount of time.

“Raising Mišpāṭ” found rhetorical devices which most effectively communicate advocacy to the masses in times when reality is in need of alteration. This was done through a thorough analysis of how leaders of mass movements motivate their audiences–both off and online. These analyses uncovered the rhetorical devices which most effectively motivate the masses to react to a message.

5

To illustrate, three rhetorical artifacts were examined: Abraham Lincolnʼs Last Public Address, Nelson Mandelaʼs Speech on His Release From Prison, and Invisible Childrenʼs Kony 2012. Both Lincoln and Mandela use speech as a means to advocate against racial abuse–rooted in Government–in their own countries. On the other hand, San Diego based Invisible Children (IC) advocate for the end of crimes against humanity being committed by a nongovernment African organization: the Lordʼs Resistance Army (LRA). Lincolnʼs rhetoric was delivered beyond his immediate audience by newspaper, Mandela had the benefit of television and radio, and IC used the internet. These three mass movement artifacts all address social justice as they seek to motivate the masses to act towards restoring harmony and equality in oppressed regions of the world. They were compared and contrasted to extrapolate how future advocates may motivate others to transform atrocities into beauty.

In order for activism to occur, an atrocity must first occur.

Activism is a method wherein participants use their abilities to bring about social change. This thesis seeks to identify some of the required tools for inducing successful mass movements using the most effective media available today: the internet. In order to demonstrate the power of the web, I will first look at two offline rhetorical artifacts and see how they effectively used rhetoric as a

6

motivational tool. The first artifact is President Abraham Lincolnʼs Last Public Address; the second is Nelson Mandelaʼs Speech on His Release From Prison. These two speeches were made by mass movement leaders in the midst of crises in either North America or South Africa. Both rhetoricians used their speeches to motivate the masses towards unprecedented change. That being said, I can think of no more appropriate artifacts to extrapolate examples of effective mobilization rhetoric.

In Kony 2012, Lincolnʼs Last Public Address, and Mandelaʼs Speech on His Release From Prison, we can see elements of Agenda-Setting Theory, the Elaboration Likelihood Model, and Eric Hofferʼs notion of Mass Movement doctrine. This thesis will identify the common rhetoric of each of these movements to explain why ICʼs audience reacted in response to Kony 2012ʼs release. Raising Mišpāṭ will identify which elements of the film most-likely persuaded viewers to distribute the film globally and take action against the LRA. Moreover, it will compare the mass “buzz” around Kony 2012 to the actual work that occurred in 2012 by viewers. Essentially, this thesis will analyze the effectiveness that mass movement rhetoric has in inspiring viewers to take action.

Activism, by its nature, forces people to observe the world outside of individualism. The research question this thesis seeks to answer is: “what rhetorical tools are crucial for activists to optimize

7

success today?” Even though many social movements were successful before the digital-age, web-based activism can reach its goals more effectively than traditional activism because the Internet enables ideas to reach more people in less time and because the Internet is more conducive to immediate action from the audience than traditional media. Christian Smith, a professor and Chair of the Department of Sociology at the University of North Carolina, argues that Western secular society is not the aftermath of modernization, but rather the success of secular activism (Smith, 2003). To put it simply, the West did not become secular because of innovation and progress. Rather, secularization was the result of “largely skeptical, freethinking, agnostic, atheist, or theologically liberal, well educated, socially knowledgeable” activists “who generally espoused materialism, naturalism, positivism, and the privatization or extinction of religion” who “overthrew a religious establishmentʼs control over socially legitimate knowledge” (Smith, 2003). If Smithʼs correlation is accurate and the secularist worldview was able to infiltrate North America by activists voicing their worldview while looking for intellectual justice, Activism should be able to do likewise in search of justice for victims of the LRA. If the results of justice activism are similar to those of the secularist movement, we may see an outburst of justice like no other generation has. This age will never be able to be called complacent should such a step

8

towards justice be taken. I believe that some of the ʻtenetsʼ of ʻlanguageʼ of secular humanism has the capacity to achieve much good in certain domains of human existence and experience. If a generation whose passion is justice can communicate this effectively to the masses, this generation has the potential to be remembered as Generation Justice.

The mission statement of IC is: Invisible Children exists to bring a permanent end to LRA atrocities (Invisible Children Q&A, 2012, ¶ 2). The organization aims to do so through a four-part model: Media, Mobilization, Protection, and Recovery (2012). The media consists of internally produced films that will “inspire global action” against the LRA (2012, ¶ 3). Mobilization refers to organized groups “advancing international efforts to end LRA atrocities” (2012, ¶ 3).

Protection refers to ICʼs implementation of technological systems that warn communities of forthcoming LRA attacks and aims to encourage the LRA to surrender (2012, ¶ 3). Lastly, recovery is concerned with Invisible Childrenʼs efforts in establishing postconflict peace and rehabilitation (2012, ¶ 3).

On Monday March 5, 2012, Invisible Children released a video titled Kony 2012. In 29:59 minutes, the documentary informs viewers of the ongoing African rebel group The Lordʼs Resistance Army (LRA). Since itʼs release, the film has reached nearly a hundred million views and has mobilized thousands of activists

9

from all corners of the earth to join the movement. Thousands upon thousands of activists from all across the globe participated in the filmʼs main event “Cover the Night” on April 20, 2012. In November, another event targeted at supporters in America called “Move: DC” motivated twelve thousand four hundred and sixty four activists to pay their own way to Washington, D.C. where they surrounded the White House advocating that America do their part in stopping Joseph Kony and his army. The LRA is an armed group that has been active “since at least 1987” (Cathala, 2005). They have “engaged in a cycle of violence and established pattern of ʻbrutalization of civiliansʼ by acts including murder, abduction, sexual enslavement, mutilation, as well as mass burning of houses and looting of camp settlements” (Cathala, 2005). This rebel group is led by the man whom The International Criminal Court has identified as one of the 10 most wanted criminals in the world– Joseph Kony. The ICC warranted his arrest on July 8, 2005, but the warlord remains free. The warlordʼs profile on the ICC website reads as follows: " " "

Mr Kony is allegedly criminally responsible for thirty-three counts on the basis of individual criminal responsibility (articles 25(3)(a) and 25 (3) (b) of the Statute) including: Twelve counts of crimes against humanity (murder - article 7 (1)(a); enslavement - article 7(1)(c); sexual enslavement – article 7(1)(g); rape - article 7(1)(g); inhumane acts of inflicting serious bodily injury and suffering - article 7(1)(k)); and,Twenty-one counts of war crimes (murder - article 8(2) (c)(i); cruel treatment of civilians – article 8(2)(c)(i);

10

intentionally directing an attack against a civilian population – article 8(2)(e)(i); pillaging - article 8(2) (e)(v); inducing rape – article 8(2)(e)(vi); forced enlistment of children - 8(2)(e) (vii)) (“Situation in Uganda”). " " Kony 2012 stems from the assertion that if Joseph Kony is arrested, the LRA will be weakened and can be eliminated. The method IC chooses to use resembles that of a political election, with videos, news stories, posters, logos, and mottos.The goal is to make Joseph Kony famous–infamously hated. Only, unlike American elections, Kony 2012 is a grass roots movement with a goal, not to elect a leader, but to arrest one. A grass roots movement involves having “ordinary people regarded as the main body of an organization's membership” (New Oxford American Dictionary).

The film compelled viewers from North America to participate in an event called “Cover the Night” on April 20, 2012. Viewers were asked to spend the night covering their cities with posters and other media making it impossible for Joseph Kony to go unnoticed.

“Action Kits” containing the non-profits logos, mottos, and narrative were available as free download at kony2012.com. The major components of activism include actors, motivation, culture and ideology, political opportunities, material resources, issue framing, strategy, and organizations (Smith, 2003). The actors are those whom the film motivates towards acting on behalf of the victims of the LRA. The motivation is an intense desire to see the LRA

11

stopped due to the secular humanistic view of the inherent value of human life. " The culture and ideology communicated by Kony 2012 are different than the media tells us about this generation, but are inline with research statistics. Many of us sense a general attitude that this generation of North Americans are self-focused, capitalists lacking the desire to share their resources for the benefit of others.

However, data from an annual research project called The American Freshman substantiates the notion that those pursuing post-secondary education in America in 2012 were less apathetic than those born between 1966 and 1970 (Pryor et al., 2012, 2008).

In 2012, 87.4% of baccalaureate students did volunteer work and 44.1% publicly communicated their opinion about a cause (Pryor et al., 2012, p.32). On the other hand, when the idea of community service or volunteer work was introduced to the survey in 1990, only 16.9% of freshmen indicated they were likely to participate in the activity (Pryor et al., 2006, p.54). Furthermore, in 2000, before 9/11, a record low of 28.1% of students saw keeping up with political affairs as an “essential” or “very important” goal; however, in 2008 this percentage rose to 39.5% (Pryor et al., 2008, p.4).

Statistically, this generation is less apathetic than their parents and the response to Kony 2012 is consistent with this.

12

" The predominant political opportunity communicated is that the warrant for Joseph Kony始s arrest was issued seven years ago, yet he remains free. Kony 2012 was released during an American election year when candidates were rallying for change and the American values were being carefully defended and debated in both the United States and Canada. IC is a well-established, highly supported organization with the material resources available to spread the message efficiently. They had access to the very talented filmmakers, story writers, communication specialists, public relations agents, graphic designers, web developers and more.

They were able to frame the tragedies inflicted upon victims of the LRA as stemming from its leader Joseph Kony. The film clearly laid out a strategy to abolish the LRA. Viewers would ensure that the culture shapers and policymakers knew that the people in the democratic nations of the United States and Canada wanted to stop Joseph Kony and that they were not complacent. This knowledge advocated for a culture wherein people are not apathetic and policymakers would send support to capture Kony. America would stop him like they stopped Osama Bin Laden. Activists would be cultivated by IC, but grow into other organizations, such as the federal systems and news media.

13

Generative Approach " The components of the rhetoric of Kony 2012 are not unlike those found in other movements as the campaign to end apartheid and civil rights movements in the Americas. Though the communication mediums of these various activists differ, they do have common components. They all ask for Americans to reject complacency and embrace justice. In order to discover why these artifacts were persuasive, I took a generative approach. This approach allowed me first uncover the rhetorical tools used by reputable mass movement leaders before the digital age and examine if and how they were used in online mass mobilization.

Generative Criticism In rhetorical criticism there are a variety of different formal frameworks available to critique artifacts; however, these frameworks do not necessarily highlight the most interesting or dominant rhetorical elements of artifacts (Foss, 2004 p.411). In her Chapter on Generative Criticism, Sonja Foss provides a nine step process to Generative Criticism. These steps were the guideline for generating the Mass Mobilization Framework used in this thesis.

14 Table 1.0: Generative Criticism Methodology

Step

Procedure

1

Encountering a curious artifact

2

Coding the artifact in general

3

Searching for an explanation

4

Creating an explanatory schema

5

Formulating a research question

6

Coding the artifact in detail

7

Searching the literature

8

Framing the Study

9

Writing the essay

Following Kony 2012Ęźs release I was intrigued to know what about the film made it so persuasive. Links and images from the artifact inundated my social networking accounts and the media were frequently reporting on the viral video. Small groups of activists were forming around the globe and I wanted to know how the film motivated them to do so. I re-watched the documentary, examined scripts, and looked through theoretical lenses. However, the artifact itself gave no real answer to the question: “why is this persuasive.â€? In search of an explanation, I sifted through academic databases and popular search engines to find other similar artifacts, but I did not yield results. All I found were articles praising IC for their unprecedented motivational film. Therefore, I expanded the genre from internet-based mass movement artifacts to all mass movement artifacts. After careful deliberation, I settled on

15

comparing Kony 2012 to Abraham Lincolnʼs Last Public Address and Nelson Mandelaʼs Speech on His Release for Prison. The three of these artifacts all address administering justice and restoring peace and equality to oppressed regions. Lincoln spoke to Union supporters concerning restoring Slave States, Mandela spoke to anti-apartheid activists on the topic of continuing to advocated for racial equality, and Kony 2012 addressed North Americans in order to ask for support to continue ICʼs campaign to see a permanent end to LRA atrocities in affected regions in order to restore peace.

I coded both Lincoln and Mandela to find which behavioral communication theories best explained the rhetoric of the two offline artifacts and concluded that the Elaboration Likelihood Model, Agenda Setting Theory, and theories from Eric Hofferʼs The True Believer all illuminated rhetorical devices within the artifacts.

From these theories, I took elements from each to create an explanatory schema (Step 3) for this generative criticism. The explanatory schema is titled The Mass Mobilization Framework (MMF). With this framework, I sought to see how the medium of the web affected the effectiveness of the MMF. In other words, how did persuasiveness increase or decrease from the offline artifacts to the online artifact? I carefully coded all three artifacts in light of this framework to see how each rhetorʼs artifact used the MMF. To get a

16

a more precise conception of how the MMF unfolded, it was necessary to carefully examine the rhetors, the audience, and rhetorical situation. I searched through academic databases and cultural archives (newspapers and search engines) in order to understand the context, both culturally and technologically, that the rhetor communicated. This illuminated how the messages may have been received and decoded.

This type of text-driven generative criticism is very common in communication research, particularly in the field of social advocacy.

In his journal article featured in the Quarterly Journal of Speech, Stephen Brown takes a text driven approach to explain how sentimentalism affected the Northern states attitude towards the Slave States during the Civil War (1994). He first notes that interpretive barriers would be created were he to apply a formal method of criticism. Therefore, he formulated his own framework that was driven by a textual analysis (1994).

In addition to formulating new frameworks for analysis, borrowing from other theorists is also common in communication scholarship. In an article on environmentalism, Killingsworth and Palmer, generate a theory from elements borrowed from Foucaultʼs The History of Sexuality and Freudʼs feminist criticisms (1995). In the same articles, the scholars comment on the significance of doing generative criticism: “by interweaving the themes of the two

17

literatures, we hope to advance the work of rhetorical criticism in the newly founded subfield of environmental rhetoric” (1995, p.3).

As they justify their generative approach, Rushing and Frentz clarify that “a model may consist of a single theoretical framework or a synthesis of more than one perspective” (1980).

For this thesis, a generative approach allowed me to derive the rhetorical tools used in this speeches more accurately than a formal theory permits. It allowed for text-driven analysis and eliminated interpretive barriers that more “cookie-cutter” type of criticism would have raised. By interweaving the three behavioural theories, I was able to create a model that will, hopefully, further the study of mass movement rhetoric and internet communication. As of now, this field has a limited amount of literature as the medium has only been popularized in the last decade.

18

Chapter 2: Literature Review: Behavioural Communication Models

19

The Elaboration-Likelihood Model: McCombs and Cacioppoʼs Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM ) provides a framework for persuasion based on the audienceʼs interest level. People who have a high interest in the topic are persuaded by the central route, meaning that they carefully evaluate the actual message content, while people with low interest carefully evaluate peripheral cues. Peripheral cues are elements in the communication setting such as the location that information is given, the medium it passes through, and the credentials of the sender. However, many peopleʼs interest level lies somewhere in between the extremes. Those with moderate interest concerning an issue most carefully evaluate both peripheral cues and content (Petty et al., 1987). Two social psychologists, Richard Petty and John Cacioppo developed the Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM) during the 1980s (Miller, 2004). On the basis that people like to hold “correct” attitudes, this model maintains that the goal of persuasion is to motivate the audienceʼs attitude to align with that of the rhetorʼs (Petty et al., 1987). The degree by which the audience is interested in the speakerʼs message is the determinate in regards to attitude alignment (Petty et al.,1987).

The ELM highlights routes to persuasion based on the extent to which the the audience is motivated to elaborate on the rhetors message (Petty et al., 1987). Personal relevance, the need for

20

cognition, and personal responsibility are the deciding factors for how likely it is that an audience member will adopt the rhetorʼs attitude (Miller, 2004). These three factors combine to form “elaboration likelihood” and are rated as either high, moderate, or low (Miller, 2004). Depending on the score, the rhetor can take varying routes to persuasion (Miller, 2004). One may assume that if the elaboration likelihood is low that reaching any communication goals would be unlikely; however, this model provides a framework towards attitudes adjustments for even the least interested person, so long as they show any sign of attention to the rhetorʼs message.

Petty and Cacioppoʼs model provides two pathways towards attitude shift: the central route and the peripheral route (Petty et al., 1987). The actual content of the speakerʼs message is the primary concern on the central route, while the peripheral route focuses on the communication situation (Stiff, 1986). On the central route, the content of the speakerʼs message is analyzed (Stiff, 1986).

Listeners carefully attend to elements such as vocabulary choice, reason, logic, and evidence. If a listener finds the subject relevant to their life, they will likely continue to listen and be active in the message presented. If the message is salient to the audience, they will examine the message itself. For example, if you are speaking about sharks to determine the best available means of persuasion, you may wish to ask questions about your audienceʼs interest in

21

aquatic life or infer from audience analysis. Do they come from a family of scuba divers or fishermen? Will sharks be brought up again in their future? If the answer to any of these types of question is yes, you then consider the audience始s likelihood to continue on the central route. In order to proceed, the audience should have minimal distractions and prior knowledge that can contribute to understanding and/or be able to interpret the information presented by the speaker. If either hold true, the audience始s cognitive process now determine what type of route is best for persuasion. If the audience seems to have an opinion, good or bad, on the subject a favorable or unfavorable cognitive change will likely occur.

Answering yes to the preceding questions guides the audience along the central route to achieving the communication goal of attitude change. However, answering no to any of the questions will provide an exit ramp to the peripheral route.

The peripheral route is focused on the persuasive situation itself (Stiff, 1986). This means the communication goal of attitude change is more likely to result from the speaker始s attractiveness, from the setting wherein the message is delivered, or the quantity of arguments. In this sense, attractiveness does not necessarily refer to physicality, but also to credentials, similar interests, and similar values. To put it simple, a speaker is seen as attractive if the audience is interested to know more about them based on their

22

perceived credibility. According to the authors of ELM, audiences may be persuaded via the peripheral route if they are not motivated or if they are unable to process the argument itself. However, the model holds that “some minimal level of involvement is required for peripheral cues to have any affect” (Petty et al., 1987, p.239). If this is the case, the situation itself will determine a shift in attitude regarding the topic covered.

In their response to Stiffʼs critique of the ELM, Petty et al. explain the relationship between argument structure and attitude change.

They concluded that attitude can be altered if the number of arguments is aligned with the level of involvement (1987).

Persuasion increases for those with low levels of involvement as the number of arguments increases (Petty et al, 1987). In the language of the ELM, the more arguments presented to an audience that has minimal interest–low elaboration likelihood–the more they will be persuaded (Petty et al., 1987). The quantity of arguments is key for those on the peripheral route. However, if your audience is interested in the topic,and therefore following the central route, the quality is more important than quantity in terms of arguments presented.

Another significant attribute of the Elaboration Likelihood Model is the role source attractiveness plays in persuasion. If source attractiveness can be attached to the merit of the subject, attraction

23

will serve as an argument for those of high involvement on the central route (Petty et al., 1987). For example, if the topic is getting perfect skin and the sender has terrible acne, the audience becomes considerably less likely to be persuaded by the senderʼs arguments. On the other hand, if the sender had a flawless complexion, they themselves serve as an argument. Likewise, if a middle-aged man in a wheelchair is trying to sell skateboards to teenagers, their dissimilarities may lead the teens to find him unattractive–if they do not desire to know more about him.

Skateboarders would be more relatable to the audience and, therefore, seen as a more attractive actors for the ad. In most cases of people with low elaboration likelihood, attraction significantly increased the likelihood of achieving communication goals (Petty et al., 1987). However, audiences belonging to either route more carefully processed the arguments made by people they found attractive–in the sense defined earlier (Petty et al., 1987).

To clarify, people who have a high interest in the topic carefully evaluate the actual message contents, while people with low interest carefully evaluate peripheral cues. However, many people have an interest level somewhere between the extremes. Those with moderate interest concerning an issue carefully evaluate both source and content (Petty et al., 1987).

24 Figure 1.0: The ELM

Agenda Setting Theory While the ELM proposes that the sender should carefully assess its receivers before message encoding, Agenda-Setting Theory proposes that the sender can persuade its audience through repeated exposure. This is particularly salient in terms of offline versus online mass movements because the internet provides more personalized viewing options. In 1922, Walter Lippman proposed a theory wherein the media depicted events for the public in a manner that allowed policy makers to refer to them for “democratic� opinion swaying (Miller, 2004). In other words, the images painted by the media provided policy makers with a planned framework to present issues concerning the general public.

25

When the theory was first present, war propaganda dominated the mass media and, therefore, many theorists were interested in the direct effects that media had on its audience (Miller, 2004).

However, as time passed war propaganda did as well. This moved the focus of mass media studies towards studying how mass media influenced the publicʼs belief of which issues were most important (Miller, 2004). In an era wherein “most of what people know comes to them ʻsecondʼ or ʻthirdʼ hand from the mass media or from other people,” understanding the relationship between mass media and public opinion became important (McCombs & Shaw, 1972, p.176).

Therefore, the post-positive theory of Agenda-Setting Theory was formed to study correlations between mass media and public opinion.

In 1972, Max McCombs and Donald Shaw studied the issues people found important during the 1968 presidential campaign in Chapel Hill, North Carolina (Miller, 2004). Their “touchstone” theory looked at how the media influenced the salience of issues for the public. Salience is a term that is described by Richard Vatz as the “choice of what facts or events are relevant” and what Perelman refers to as “presence” (Vatz 1973, p.157). The subject that is the most relevant and present in an artifact, is the salient subject. It was found that what the media dedicated the most time and space to was viewed by the public as most important (Miller, 2004).

26

Following their study, another scholar found that though many “ʻhearʼ few ʻlisten;ʼ” however, those with most media exposure know the most about where candidates stand on issues” (McCombs & Shaw, 1993). In other words, few people try to decode the messages sent by the media, but those who are presented with higher quantities of election media know more about the candidates. This is very similar to the theory presented in the ELM where the more arguments presented to an audience with lowelaboration likelihood, on the peripheral route, the more persuasive the rhetoric is.To give an analogy, the more news bullets that are fired at the public, the greater the chance that the public will be hit– regardless of whether or not they are actively listening. Since these studies, much scholarly research has been dedicated to AgendaSetting Theory (McCombs & Shaw, 1993). The theory continuously generates inquiry, which philosopher of science James Conant (1951) claims is the ground for identifying a theory as successful (McCombs & Shaw, 1993).

Agenda-setting theory is more complex than simply frequency in the media being the basis for opinion forming. The theory proposes that there are three differing agendas that all influence each other: the media, the public, and the policy agenda. The media agenda is composed of the topics covered by media sources such as television, radio, newspaper, and internet; the public agenda

27

contains those topics that the public perceives as important; and issues that those who influence the legislation process believe to be important form the policy agenda (Miller, 2004).

Table 2.0 Agenda Setting Theory

Agenda Type

Members

Media

Topics covered in the media

Public

Topics the public views as important

Policy

Issues important in political spheres

Although the media, public, and policy agendas may closely resemble each other, the largest difference lies in causation: “each variable can be seen as a dependent variable in a causal equation” (Miller, 2004, p.271). A public agenda may be seen as identical to a policy agenda, but the public agenda may have resulted from the media agenda and not the policy agenda. Each agenda has the potential to influence another.

Another agenda that entered Agenda-Setting Theory in the eighties is that of personal concerns–wherein politics “is but a single entry” (McCombs & Shaw, 1993, 61). Each agenda is composed of “a set of objects, public issues” (McCombs & Shaw, 1993, p.61). Communication is constantly unfolding and is composed of various objects vying for the spotlight. Depending on which agenda sends the message, the object in the spotlight differs (McCombs & Shaw, 1993, p.63). A fifth agenda to consider is that of

28

attributes. An agenda of attributes is exemplified in McCombs and Shawʼs political campaign wherein other agendas such as family, friends, and news media contribute to forming a view on the election candidates (McCombs & Shaw, 1993). These two additional agendas represent influential factors outside of legislation, the media, and popular opinion.

The simple idea proposed by Agenda-Setting Theory is that the public mirrors the news media in terms of what it assigns value to (Miller, 2004). The authors of the Agenda-Setting Theory state that issue salience is influenced by the number of times an issue or cause appears in the media (Miller, 2004). The more frequently an issue is presented by the media, the more salient the issue will become for the public. A broad-range of studies support AgendaSetting theory in having found that “the public agenda was virtually a reflection of the media agenda” (Miller, 2004, p.272). However, the idea that the media directly causes the public agenda is considerably less supported.

For Factor B to result directly from Factor A, three factors must be considered. Firstly, causality only exists if there is covariation between the cause and effect. Secondly, Factor A (the cause) must occur before Factor B (the result). Lastly, all other reasons for Factor B (the result) to occur must be eliminated (Miller, 2004). In looking at Agenda-Setting Theory in light of causation research, the

29

bulk of research findings indicate that “ a clear causal influence of the media upon the public” does exist (Miller, 2004, p.273). The media creates or constitutes salience and salience has a bearing on persuasion as the ELM proposes.

It appears that the media agenda has greater influence on other agendas in specific situations. In other words, under certain circumstances, the media agenda will dictate the public agenda to a greater extent. Weaver identified the “need for orientation” as one contributing factor (Miller, 2004). This need is the result of oneʼs interest and certainty about an issue; itʼs salience (Miller, 2004). For example, someone who knows very little about foreign economies, but who is interested in Canadaʼs orientation towards free trade, is likely to form an opinion on Canadaʼs free trade agreements from the media (ie. CBC reporters).

Another factor that increases the likelihood of Agenda-Setting is “issue obtrusiveness” (Miller, 2004). The “obtrusiveness” of an issue depends on the amount of first-hand contact the public has with the issue (Miller, 2004). If the public relies solely on the media for information about the issues, it is considered unobtrusive. The media agenda most directly influences the public agenda if this is the case.

Both the need for orientation and issue obtrusiveness fall into the subheading “contingency factors.” However, McCombs and

30

Shaw explain deviations in agenda-setting by looking at the theory on two levels: first level agenda-setting and second level agendasetting. The former is concerned with the issues that the media and public agendas include, while the latter dictates what issues people care about and how people perceive those issues (Miller, 2004).

Looking back to the ELM, this should be determined by deciding if your audienceʼs interest level is low, moderate, or high and then following the appropriate route.

In addition to contingency factors and two-level agenda-setting, framing and priming also contribute to Agenda-Setting Theory. In his study of CBSʼs input towards a 1960s student movement, Todd Gitlin introduced the concept of framing (McCombs & Shaw 62). He found that viewers formed attitudes on the protests depending on which aspects reporters predominately emphasized. Framing is concerned with how an issue is presented (Miller, 2004). It looks at subtopics mentioned, the size and placement of an issue, and the narrative form and tone an issue is presented in (Miller, 2004). For example, if negative elements are emphasized by the media, the public will probably form a negative orientation towards that issue.

Furthermore, a study by David Cohen (1975) revealed that “the attributes of [the development of Lake Monroe in central Indiana] emphasized in the news coverage correlated very highly with

31

attributes deemed important by the public and discussed most often by the public” (McCombs and Shaw 63).

While framing refers to how an issue is presented, priming is defined as “ effects of a particular, prior context on the retrieval and interpretation of information” (Fiske & Taylor, 1991). To put it differently, priming involves applying concepts stored in oneʼs memory to make sense of a new circumstances. It is applying past information to a situation at-hand. In terms of Agenda-Setting Theory, an example of priming is that after recently hearing President Obama claim that China refuses to adhere to the World Trade Organizationʼs rules, the public may poorly asses Canadaʼs decision to sign free trade agreements with China. Top-of-mind information is used to asses new information.

In sum, First-Level Agenda-Setting Theory determines what the public will care about, while Second-Level Agenda-Setting Theory dictates what the public will think about and how they will think about it. Various agendas are involved in the process, including those of media, public, policy, personal concerns, and attributes.

These agendas are differentiated in how they cause the content of another to match their own. Studies show that more media exposure to an issue will forge a similar opinion on the matter in the mind of the viewer as was in the sender. Furthermore audience interest, or their need for orientation, is crucial in determining the

32

degree that an agenda will influence another; greater interest translates to more media exposure. More media exposure translates to having an opinion similar to the media. In addition, the obtrusiveness of an issue also dictates how influential one agenda is on another. If the person relies solely on the media for information, they will likely form an opinion similar to that of the media. Moreover, each source frames and primes the viewer for opinion forming. Framing refers to which aspects of the story are emphasized, while priming refers to any information given before the sender begins persuasion.

When the rhetor chooses to highlight certain elements in a situation, they select the elements that are salient in a situation or event (Vatz,1973). Agenda-Setting and the ELM provide guidance as to what areas to make salient to best persuade your audience through rhetoric. Vatz argues that “meaning is not discovered in situations, but created by rhetors,� particularly by their word choice (Vatz, 1973, p.157). I will describe salience in this research by referencing Agenda Setting Theory. Salience will be determined by identifying how rhetors both create the rhetorical situation through framing and how they prime their audience to receive their framework of the situation.

Eric HofferĘźs The True Believer

33

If appearing out of thin air is possible, Eric Hoffer mastered it.

There is literally no information about this mass movement mastermind before 1934 (Bethell, 2012). That year “he found himself broke in San Diego” where he checked into a statesponsored homeless shelter in El Centro, California (Bethell, 2012).

After working a few odd jobs, Hoffer began working on the San Diego docks in the forties and it was then that he wrote his most well-known work: The True Believer (Bethell, 2012). In his book, Eric Hoffer: The Longshoreman Philosopher, Bethell asks the provocative question: “Did he really teach himself botany, chemistry, and hebrew on skid row in Los Angeles?” (2012). This question seems ridiculous, but with no known recorded past, this may be the best guess. After The True Believer was published, Hoffer rose from an unknown fisherman to the author of the book which sat on President Eisenhowerʼs bedside table (Bethell, 2012).

As a result of many intellectuals praising Hofferʼs creative intelligence, he became a professor at the University of CaliforniaBerkely in the mid-sixties during the free speech movement (Bethell, 2012).

In his foundational book, Hoffer attempts to identify what a rhetor must do to motivate a person to become “a true believer” (Larrabee, 1952). Put simply, Hoffer formulates an ideal rhetor to lead the masses: “a completely self-assured leader who

34

holds home and ʻfreedom from freedomʼ through ardent, mindless activity in a mass crusade against a ʻdevilʼ of preferably foreign origins” (Larrabee, 1952).

Put differently, a “true believer” is one who is confident in himself and who sacrifices his own status to serve others (freedom from freedom) as he or she advocates for the elimination of a particular evil. Hoffer views “the art of turning practical causes into holy causes” as a crucial element for the rhetor (1951). Through this “religification” the rhetor can garner audience support by using religion–or even nationalism–as a vehicle of change (1951). If we dissect most religious doctrines, we will see a similar conversion program in each.

During the initial conversion stage, the person sees the desire to change. According to Hoffer, this desire for change stems from something greater than discontent (1951, p.7). He argues that people generally prefer to stick to the familiar–be it desirable or not.

Few step out of their ordinary, but those who do tend to “feel they are in possession of some irresistible power” (1951, p.8). This sense of power fills the once content person with the desire for change. However, empowering is not the only way to instill the desire for change. Faith in the future is all the more effective: “for the hopeful can draw strength from the most ridiculous sources of power–a slogan, a word, a button” (1951, p.9). It seems a bit

35

ludicrous to attribute the desire for change to two features.

However, the feeling of power and hope in the future slays fear.

This encourages the comfortable to step beyond their circumstances and become “receptive to change” (1951, p.9). Hope in the future gives potential “true believers” the opportunity to be discontent with their present situation, but guards them from destitution (1951). How is it then that a rhetor makes the discontented, comfortable crowd feel they have “irresistible power” or that the future is hopeful?

First we will examine one source Hoffman identifies as “irresistible power”–doctrine. Doctrine is defined as “what is taught as the belief of a church, a nation, or a group of persons; belief; principle” (Barnhart & Barnhart (Eds.), 1986). This doctrine must be presented as the only acceptable way to view the situation: " " " "

The effectiveness of a doctrine does not come from its meaning but from its certitude. No doctrine however profound and sublime will be effective unless it is presented as the embodiment of the one and only truth (1951, p.79).

The doctrine cannot be substituted. In terms of religious

organizations a doctrine is often labelled “a statement of faith.” In accordance with the Weselyn doctrine, Kingswood University proposes a statement of faith which reads as follows: " " " "

Owned and operated by The Wesleyan Church, Kingswood University affirms the Articles of Religion as found in The Discipline of The Wesleyan Church, which includes the following summary of doctrinal beliefs:"

36

(1)We believe in God the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.

(2)We believe that Jesus Christ the Son suffered in our place on the cross, that He died but rose again, that He now sits at the Father's right hand until He returns to judge all men at the last day.

(3)We believe in the Holy Scriptures as the inspired and inerrant Word of God. We believe that by the grace of God every person has the ability and responsibility to choose between right and wrong, and that those who repent of their sin and believe in the Lord Jesus Christ are justified by faith.

(4)We believe that God not only counts the believer as righteous, but that He makes such persons righteous, freeing them of sin's dominion at conversion which in Hofferʼs perspective could be seen as a ʻfrustrationʼ right?,may want to add a sentence or two to make this connection purifying their hearts by faith and perfecting them in love at entire sanctification, and providing for their growth in grace at every stage of their spiritual life, enabling them through the presence and power of the Holy Spirit to live victorious lives– ("Statement of faith," 2013).

In sum, this document claims that a person is able to become righteous and “live a victorious” life with the help of the Holy Spirit by believing that God sent His son to crucifixion for humanityʼs sin and rose Him to Godʼs right hand as accounted in the Bible. This doctrine is unique in that empowers a potential believer to choose to believe, yet this belief is hinged on the acts of others. The audience is empowered, yet vacated of power. This doctrine places the audience and rhetor in a state of interdependence. The Trinity cannot save a person by the resurrection alone, and an audience member cannot be saved by belief alone. First the act must have occurred, but the act of resurrection was done in vain without audience belief. Thus, the rhetor and the audience are mutually

37

dependent because the goal can only be met if each party participates.

After having put “fifty-four contemporary (1958-1968) speeches [through] nineteen types of analysis,” Roderick P. Hart explained the paradigm as follows: “Doctrine seems to render speakers and listeners mutually dependent–the former will be helpful and acquiescent if the latter conforms to certain ground rules” (1971, p.

261). In terms of mass movements, the audience is given the power to fulfill the speakerʼs rhetoric in a way that the speaker alone cannot. Hoffer argues that this role can cause people to desire change. It can motivate them to act in accordance with the rhetor (1951, p.11). Therefore, Hofferʼs ideology suggests that a doctrine that requires the rhetor and the audience to be mutually dependent is a key rhetorical tool for mobilizing the masses towards mišpāṭ .

A second element of mass movement rhetoric is that of selfsacrifice. Hoffer argues that doctrine is one of many “instruments of unification and means used to inculcate a readiness for selfsacrifice.” The idea that people would be willing to give of themselves for a cause may contradict the readily accepted belief that people are by nature selfish. However, Hoffer states that “in the poignantly frustrated the propensities for united action and selfsacrifice arise spontaneously” (1951, p.58). To put it differently,

38

people who are frustrated are most susceptible to united action and self-sacrifice. With that said, a rhetor who wishes to be mutually dependent with his or her audience must first instill a sense of frustration. This can be accomplished through the present state of the masses or by resurfacing prior frustrations. Hoffer states that in trying to unite people and persuade them to act selflessly, regardless of our intentions, we ask them to deny themselves as “we strive to evoke and cultivate in them many of the diverse attitudes and impulses which accompany the frustrated� (1951, p.

59). In essence, the rhetor gets his audience distressed and annoyed with the situation. In doing so, the audience is more susceptible to commit to united action and self-sacrifice. Depending on the level of engagement, this frustrated people could use either central or peripheral cues for persuasion as highlighted by the ELM. However, those invested in a cause to the degree that they have become genuinely frustrated with their present situation tend to have high elaboration likelihood. Consequently, central cues would most effectively sway the opinion of the frustrated.

While frustration could serve to inculcate the need for group unity and selflessness, Hoffer advances his argument by claiming that the audienceĘźs frustration should be directed towards themselves (1951, p.58). It is self-frustration that promotes self-renunciation: " "

The revulsion from an unwanted self, and the impulse to forget it, mask it, slough it off and lose it, produce both a

39

" " "

readiness to self-sacrifice and a willingness to dissolve it by losing oneʼs individual distinctness in a compact collective whole (Hoffer, 1951, p.58).

Therefore, the rhetor ought to cause his audience to feel

frustrated with themselves and provide the resolution for selffrustration by union with the rhetorʼs mass movement.

Hoffer suggests that a mass movement should target those already in a state of frustration, but not all are so lucky to handpick their audiences (1951). In his article, Communication as Transcendence, Gregory J. Shepherd defines communication as “the experience of transcending oneʼs current self, overcoming oneʼs current self, to become more than what one was through connection with another” (2010, p. 22). Therefore, by Shepherdʼs definition, communication itself is dependent on people moving beyond themselves in order to connect with another. If Shepherdʼs definition holds true, the rhetor may be able to promote selfrenunciation and united action without stimulating self-frustration.

Rather, the rhetor may only need to establish a two-way system of communication, wherein the rhetor gives up himself to become more by his audienceʼs communication and the audience gives up themselves to become more by the rhetorʼs communication.

This two-way communication system has become popularized on the internet. Many webpages include an interactive section wherein viewers are able comment, like, share, or edit the content.

40

This type of action has been made popular by sites such as Facebook, twitter, blogs, and wikipedia. However, many other sites are integrating two-way communication tools to their websites.

While working on Obamaʼs political campaign in 2007, Chris Hughes saw the necessity of opening a two-way communication system on Obamaʼs website (Tapscott, 2009). While studying at Harvard, Hughes had worked to develop features for the now popular Facebook (2009). He had shared a room with cofounder of Facebook, Mark Zuckerberg, and realized the potential of digital social networking (2009). After incorporating tools which allowed people frequenting the site to “organize themselves, share information, and create rallies, and fundraisers” the site garnered over a million supporters and, as we now know, Obama had a great victory following this online campaign (Tapscott, 2009, p. 244).

According to Shepherd, this may be a more persuasive route than self-frustration. Following the debute of Kony 2012, a poll by CBC News revealed that of the three thousand one hundred forty-one people surveyed, 47.41% percent believed that the two-way medium of social media could help hunt down a Ugandan warlord (2012). Only 15.63% answered no (CBC News, 2012). These people believed that the internet was a medium that could facilitate mišpāṭ. Although, Shepherdʼs definition of communication has an interpersonal bend, it seems applicable to one to masses type of

41

rhetoric as well. This goes back to the audience and rhetor being mutually dependent because each member relies on the other for communication purposes.

The last of Hofferʼs rhetorical devices this thesis will review is that of identifying a devil. No matter the cause, every movement is against something: “Even when men league themselves mightily together to promote tolerance and peace on earth, they are likely to be violently intolerant toward those not of a like mind” (1951, p. 97) Hoffer regards hatred as the unifying agent for mass mobilization and self-sacrifice: “Mass movements can rise and spread without belief in a God, but never without belief in a devil” (1951, p.89).

Hofferʼs ideology suggests that hatred for a single, foreign devil motivates people towards united action and self-renunciation.

Furthermore, opposing something serves as a venue for people to escape purposelessness because in addition to dedicating themselves to the “holy cause” of eradicating the devil, they “also nurse a fanatical grievance” (Hoffer,1951, p.96). In other words, joining a mass movement that is against something provides the opportunity for participants to reverse self-frustration.

While the self-made philosopher from the banks of San Diego has a mass amount of mass movement ideology, this thesis only selected a few rhetorical tools. Firstly, in order to motivate an audience to become “true believers” the rhetor must present an

42

empowering, absolute, mutually dependent doctrine that offers the audience a hopeful future. According to Hoffer, this will instill a desire for change, even amongst those who prefer to stay where they are because they are comfortable in consistency. As a further matter, the doctrine must also promote united action, self sacrifice, and hatred. Hoffer claims that causing self-frustration serves as the best route towards united action and self-sacrifice. However, this thesis will argue that two-way communication which places the rhetor and audience in a mutually dependent situation is the best route towards united action and self-sacrifice. Lastly, targeting a single, foreign devil will motivate people to join together at risk to themselves in order to destroy that devil.

Method: The Mass Mobilization Framework In order to better understand why the internet is the most persuasive medium for mass movement communication, I will critique the three artifacts through the lenses of the aforementioned theories. From these three theories, I have assembled a theory titled the Mass Mobilization Framework. The building blocks from my framework are the behavioural models of communication which illuminate which rhetorical tools rhetoricians use to construct speech which motivates their audiences. In The Gorgias , Plato communicated the idea that the spoken word of rhetoric is able to sway public opinion to a greater extent than expertise is through the

43

character of Gorgias (1994). By rhetoric one is able to motivate the masses to do whatever he or she pleases: " " " " "

Armed with this ability, in fact, the doctor would be your slave, the trainer would be yours in command, and that businessman would turn out to be making money not for himself, but for someone else–for you with your ability to speak and to persuade the masses (Plato, 1994, 452e).

Since as early as Plato, rhetoric has been used to motivate the

masses and the theories chosen for this framework explain how making certain rhetorical choices may either increase or decrease the audienceʼs interest and likelihood of action towards the rhetorʼs goals. The Mass Mobilization Framework will draw conclusions about the effectiveness of the artifacts by identifying the following components and looking at the media which they were presented through: (1) A Mutually Dependent Doctrine Asking for United Action and Self-Sacrifice Doctrine refers to a set of beliefs held and taught by a church, political party, or other group (New Oxford American Dictionary). As noted earlier, in The True Believer, Hoffer argued that successful mass movement rhetoric provides a set of beliefs wherein the rhetor depends on the audience, but also wherein the audience relies on the rhetor. One member of the movement believes he or she will not be successful if the other is inactive; they are mutually dependent. We will see this more when the media favours two-way

44

communication. Mass movement doctrine serves to join individual audience members with other audience members to advocate for the mass movementʼs goals. No individual can fulfill the rhetorʼs goals, but rather each audience member must contribute to the collective whole.

Lastly, Hoffer says that the doctrine of successful mass movements must have a call for self-sacrifice. In other words, successful doctrines require participants to give of themselves to forward the cause. A mutually dependent doctrine asking for united action and self-sacrifice will be identified in each rhetorical artifact by pinpointing calls for united action and self-sacrifice. Hoffer identified the two as imperative to mass movements, for a doctrine is but “an instrument of unification and a means used to inculcate a readiness for self-sacrifice” (1951, p. 57). If a mass movement is going to be successful, the set of beliefs taught should encourage both.

(2) A Single Devil of Preferable Foreign Origins Hoffer argues that although many successful mass movements have a god, all successful mass movements have a devil. No matter the cause, every movement is against something: “Even when men league themselves mightily together to promote tolerance and peace on earth, they are likely to be violently intolerant toward those not of a like mind” (1951, p. 97). This hatred

45

for the devil enables the audience to move beyond themselves and towards self-renunciation as they unite to oppose a common cause: “Mass movements can rise and spread without belief in a God, but never without belief in a devil” (1951, p.89). He goes on to argue that the most effective devil “is one” and foreign (1951, p.91). In having only one object of opposition the masses are able to “concentrate all hatred on a single foe” (Hoffer, 1951, p.91).

Furthermore, Hoffer justifies the need for a foreign devil in looking at how Hitler branded the German Jews as foreigners, how Russian revolutionaries focused on those of foreign ancestry, how aristocrats were termed “descendants of barbarous Germans,” and how royalists were seen as Normans during the Puritan Revolution (1951, p.92).

(3) Central and Peripheral Cues After declaring a devil, I will then examine the artifact using the peripheral and central routes from the Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM). Here we will tally the quality versus the quantity of arguments and source attractiveness to hypothesize whether-or-not the audience of the rhetors had a low, moderate, or high likelihood for elaboration. I will then form an opinion regarding the rhetorʼs choice of route to persuasion. If the audience interest level is high, the rhetorʼs discourse should have followed the central route to persuasion as, in theory, their audience will carefully evaluate their

46

message content. On the other hand, if the audience lacked interest concerning the rhetor始s topic, the rhetor should have followed the peripheral route, which focuses on the communication situation (1986).

If an audience is frustrated, lacking meaning as well as purpose in their life, and perhaps also have a feeling of 驶powerlessness始 to change their society, appeals on both routes could be successful. If the rhetor were attempting to persuade them to change a certain issue, the audience would have to have a prior interest in that subject to be persuaded on the central route. However, if the rhetor had no specific cause in mind, but rather wanted the audience to feel empowered to make a difference in the world, an audience bothered by their inability to bring change would have a high elaboration likelihood. The rhetor should then follow the central route. However, if the rhetor finds his audience to be mildly interested in changing society, he or she could persuade the audience to change their society by making appeals on the peripheral route.

As already mentioned, the content of the speaker始s message is analyzed when the central route best fits the rhetorical situation (Stiff, p.76). The intelligence and logos employed by the speaker are crucial on this route. If the audience has a high elaboration

47

likelihood, they will critique the speaker始s speech. In terms of Kony 2012, Invisible Children should have asked questions regarding how interested their audience was in social justice: Did viewers already care about ending the atrocities of the LRA? Do they have a history of advocating for the less fortunate? Will the social justice be brought up again in their future? If the answer to any of these types of question is yes, Invisible Children should then consider their audience始s ability to continue on the central route.

On the other hand, the peripheral route uses the situation itself to increase persuasive efforts made by the rhetor (Stiff, 1986). On the peripheral route, an audience is most likely to adopt the rhetor始s goals if they find the speaker attractive, the setting wherein the message is delivered to be comfortable, or the quantity of arguments to be sufficient. As previously defined in this thesis, attractiveness does not necessarily refer to physical beauty. Rather, a speaker is seen as attractive if the audience is interested in learning more about them. In their response to Stiff始s critique of the ELM, Petty et al. explain the relationship between argument structure and attitude change. They concluded that attitude can be altered if the number of arguments is aligned with the level of involvement (1987). Persuasion increases for those with low levels of involvement as the number of arguments increases (Petty et al., 1987). In the language of the ELM, if IC perceived that their

48

audience had no prior interest relevant to ending LRA atrocities, they would have used a large variety of arguments in order to increase the likeliness of persuading viewers to join their movement (Petty et al,. 1987). However, if their audience was interested in ending LRA atrocities, the quality of their arguments would have been more important then the number of arguments presented.

In critiquing Mandela, Lincoln, and Invisible Children, I will assess the types of appeals the rhetors use on both routes of persuasion in order to see if the rhetors appealed to their audiences effectively. An audience of low interest will be deemed most appealed to if many arguments, lacking depth, were provided; if the rhetors highlighted source attractiveness, and if there was a focus on their respective settings. On the other hand, if the rhetors mainly appealed to a highly interested audience, the artifacts should contain clearly explained arguments, strong vocabulary choice, and clearly explain logic. However, many people have an interest level somewhere between the extremes. Those with moderate interest concerning an issue carefully evaluate both source and content (Petty et al., 1987).

(4) Salience The final unit of analysis used in this thesis is salience. Richard Vatz describes salience as the “choice of what facts or events are relevant” and what Perelman refers to as “presence” (1973, p.157).

49

When the rhetor chooses to highlight certain elements in a situation, they select the elements that are salient in a situation or event (Vatz,1973). Vatz argues that “meaning is not discovered in situations, but created by rhetors� particularly by their word choice (1973, p.157). I will describe salience by referencing Agenda Setting Theory. Salience will be determined by identifying how the rhetors create the rhetorical situation through framing and how they prime their audience to receive their framework of the situation.

Framing is concerned with how an issue is presented (Miller, 2004). The rhetor frames an issue by choosing the amount of space dedicated to an issue and by strategically placing the doctrine in a newspaper or other medium (Miller, 2004).

Furthermore, choices concerning narrative form and tone contribute to how a rhetor frames a topic for their audience (Miller, 2004).

Agenda Setting Theory stipulates that the elements framed directly correlate with audience belief. For example, if the negative elements of a situation are emphasized by the media, the public will likely form a negative orientation towards that issue.

Framing is primarily concerned with which and what elements are presented by the rhetor, while priming is concerned with how previously learned information is used to interpret new information (Fiske & Taylor, 1991). For example, if a member of ICĘźs audience recently read an article on the topic of international ethical relations,

50

he or she would apply that information to IC始s discourse. They would use the information they knew prior to viewing the film to better understand it.

In some scenarios, rhetors are able to distribute information before actually getting to the crux of their argument or the issue presented. This should help prepare the rhetor始s audience to better understand their discourse in the manner the rhetor desires; planned priming aims to prepare the audience to be persuaded by the rhetor始s argument. How the rhetor chooses to present the situation defines its salience. Framing and priming will be the means used to identify how the rhetors present salience in their respective artifacts.

In conclusion, this thesis will use The Mass Mobilization Framework which I have generated from behavioural communication theories. This framework will provide an understanding of the persuasive, rhetorical dimensions of the selected artifacts. It will highlight the motivating elements in mass movement rhetoric across the media available since the Civil War. The units of analysis that will compose this framework are taken from the ELM, Agenda-Setting Theory, and Eric Hoffer始s The True Believer. More specifically, a doctrine that requires the audience and rhetor to depend on each other and that demands selfrenunciation and unification with a collective whole will be

51

identified-along with a devil. Furthermore, appeals to peripheral and central routes of persuasion will be compared. Lastly, salience will be identified in light of Agenda-Setting Theory by looking at how IC framed and primed their audience. These lenses which form the Mass Mobilization Framework will serve to show that all three communication situations analyzed in this thesis incorporated behavioral models of communication in their rhetoric. Moreover, the model will highlight how the internet enables mass movements to use these persuasive tactics to advocate with greater efficiency as it enables those with the power and resources to do miĹĄpÄ áš­.

52

Chapter 3: Offline Mass Movements

53

Descriptive Analysis of Offline Artifacts: Continuing to argue that even though many social movements were successful before the digital-age, web-based activism can reach its goals more effectively than traditional activism, we will carefully analyze two offline speeches. These speeches will reveal the nature of audience motivation before the web and illustrate how the internet enables ideas to reach more people in less time and how it is more conducive to immediate action from the audience than traditional media. The first speech was a motivating force preceding the reconstruction after the American Civil War; the other during South African Apartheid of the 1990s. President Abraham.

Lincoln始s Last Public Address and President Nelson Mandela始s Speech on His Release From Prison will be used to exemplify what mass movement communication was capable of prior to the digital age.

Leadership is defined as the skill of motivating others to work harder and to achieve more (Skinner, 2012). Both Abraham Lincoln and Nelson Mandela served terms as presidents of their respected countries during times when America or South Africa needed motivation for change amidst racial exploitation. The two led nations doused in civil wars; wars that no one man could respectfully end.

Lincoln and Mandela were the motivating rhetoricians of their times.

These men inspired their compatriots to move their countries closer

54

to political equality. Both led countries drenched in racial oppression attributed to white supremacy. Nevertheless, both men left their offices having inspired cultural overhauls. Lincoln and Mandela familiarized citizens with the idea of change and saturated them with hope for brighter futures. They were both powerful symbols and leaders of change. According to mass movement philosopher Eric Hoffer, only well-recognized communicators can lead reformations: " " " " "

The preliminary work of undermining existing institutions, of familiarizing the masses with the idea of change, and of creating a receptivity to a "new faith, can be done only by men who are, first and foremost, talkers or writers and are recognized as such by all. (1951).

This chapter will analyze the rhetoric used by these “talkers and

writers” to motivate their constituents to take action towards mišpāṭ . Firstly, we will look at the rhetorical situation surrounding the events to understand the context from which the rhetorʼs spoke.

Following the contextual analysis, the text of Abraham Lincolnʼs Last Public Address and Nelson Mandelaʼs Speech on His Release from Prison will be analyzed. The two will be looked at in Karlyn Kohrs-Campbellʼs terms of: purpose, audience, persona, and tone (2009). These four categories will enable us to critically understand these artifacts through systematic analysis and organization while applying the Mass Mobilization Framework.

Context of President Abraham Lincolnʼs Last Public Address

55

President Lincolnʼs Last Public Address was given on April 11th, 1865 from the window above the main door of the White House (Sandburg, 1954, p. 692). The crowd below him was filled with “panic, want, fanaticism, race hatred, cries for retribution, [and] lust for big money and fortunes” (Sandburg, 1954, p. 692). Lincoln made this speech as the end of the American Civil War (1861-1865) was unfolding (World Book, p. 629). In short, the war existed in order to preserve the National Union Party and itʼs political ideologies (World Book, p. 629). One year before the war began, South Carolina passed ordinance of secession from the Union and Abraham Lincoln was elected at the beginning of the war with Hanibal Hamlin as his vice president (World Book p. 421). This same year the southern states formed a confederacy (World Book p. 421). In 1965, Lincoln was elected for a second term with Andrew Johnson as his vice president. He was elected on November 6, receiving 180 electoral votes to 72 for John C. Breckinridge, 39 for John Bell, and 12 for Stephen A. Douglas (Richardson, 1897, p.5). On March 4, 1865, Lincoln was inaugurated for his second term (Richardson, 1897, p.5). In this term, the 13th Amendment, which prohibits slavery, was passed (World Book p. 421). The amendment reads as follows: " " " "

Section 1: Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction (Kelly & Harbison, 1970).

56

This amendment was not well-received by the slave states.

However, before I delve into the response to the Lincolnʼs rhetoric regarding the Unionʼs stance, I will first examine some of the dynamics of the Civil War. In the 1840s, America was wooing the world. It had somehow defied every doomsday prediction about democracy (Donald, 1973). Europeans visited the country in awe of its social structure (Donald, 1973). In the forties, America was known as the reconciler of “democracy and order, equality and stability” (Donald, 1973, p.3).

However, by 1861, the bloodiest event in the nationʼs history, The Civil War, would erupt from within (Vinovskis, 1989).

The Players of the Civil War The differing sides of the war are best separated as Union or Confederate members. Union states were also referred to as free states, while confederate states were sometimes referred to as slave states (J. Hall & J. Kirk (Eds.), 2005 ). The National Union Party was “the name adopted by the Republican party in the campaign of 1964” (E. C. Smith & A. J. Zurcher (Eds.), 1958, p.

259). While the Confederate States was “a government established provisionally at Montgomery, Ala., Feb. 4, 1861, by delegates from South Carolina, Mississippi, Florida, Alabama, Georgia, and Louisiana” (E. C. Smith & A. J. Zurcher (Eds.), 1958, p.85). Not long after the Confederate States were established, the

57

membership grew from six to thirteen states when Texas, Arkansas, Virginia, North Carolina, Tennessee as well as minority provisional governments in Missouri and Kentucky joined (E. C. Smith & A. J. Zurcher (Eds.), 1958, p.85). For the most part, Union States were located in the north of the country and the Confederate States were in the south (J. Hall & J. Kirk (Eds.), 2005).

With the United States of America divided in terms of political ideology, the stakes increased and the Union and Confederate sides went to war. The war cost many their lives: " " " " "

About 618,000 Union and Confederate soldiers and sailors died during the Civil War....before the Vietnam conflict, the number of deaths in the Civil War almost equaled the total number killed in all our other wars combined” (Vinovskis, 1989, p. 36).

The nation united by democracy, order, equality, and stability in the eighteen-forties had become divided in chaos only two decades later. Equity and harmony did not characterize the country. Justice was in hiding.

While this war seemed to be a war of races–blacks against whites, north again south, or slave against freed, critic Ashworth argues that class conflict was central to the controversy that saturated America–particularly the southern states–during the Civil War. While many scholars postulate that a certain awareness of classes must exist for class conflict to exist, Ashworth argues that the act of one group of people dominating another group of people,

58

be it through work or ideology–creates a class system ( Gienapp, 1997). Thus in his view, slaveholders and slaves were each a class, and what other historians have interpreted as slave resistance, Ashworth designates class conflict. Slaveholders' political actions, he contends, grew out of this constant conflict with slaves (Gienapp, 1997). In a review on Southern History, Gienapp states that “conflict between the two sections was an outgrowth of the development of capitalism in the North and that this struggle pitted pre-capitalist southern slaveholders against northern capitalist employers” (Gienapp, 1997, p. 651). In other words, the north and south were in war of labour relations between classes.

While, Ashworthʼs overarching view of the war sees it as class conflict, a more comprehensive view including the effects on civilian life in the North or the South is limited: “Very little has been published on civilian life in the North or the South during the war years and almost nothing is available on the postwar life course of Civil War veterans" (Vinovskis,1989, p. 34). By the time Lincoln gave his Last Public Address thousands upon thousands of soldiers had suffered injury or death: “Unusually high proportions of white males enlisted in the Union and the confederate forces, and many of them were wounded or killed" (Vinovskis, 1989, p. 35). The population of the South was much higher than that of the South, therefore, the North lost more soldiers (Vinovskis, 1989). However,

59

the South sustained higher percentages of loss (Vinovskis, 1989).

The soldiers who fought ranged from ages twelve to forty-nine and those under fifteen were least likely to be killed according to census data (Acton, 1877). The few studies that have been done on civilian perceptions of the Civil War indicated that "for many Americans the death of a close friend or relative was the central event of the Civil War" (Vinovskis, 1989, p. 39). The National Union Party lost more than three million soldiers; 189,000 of those soldiers were African American (Vinovskis, 1989, p. 40). Approximately nine-hundred thousand Confederate Soldiers died in war (Vinovskis, 1989, p. 40).

However, more than fifty percent of Union deaths resulted from disease (Vinovskis, 1989, p. 41). Considering the death statistics alongside class, racial, or other types of disaccord, civilian life was one of suffering by the time Lincoln gave his Last Public Address.

The History of Freedom in Antiquity indicates that the Civil War始s quest for true liberty marks the most constant, difficult, and confusing obstacle that America has faced (Acton, 1877).

On April 9, 1865, Lincoln received official notification from Confederate General, Robert E. Lee, that the war was over; the confederates had surrendered (O始Connor, 1972). The day after the next, in his Last Public Address, Lincoln revealed a plan for reconstruction, but spent very little time addressing the Union始s victory:

60

" " " " " " "

Urgently he pleaded that the nation restore the Union as quickly, as peacefully, and as painlessly as possible....The important thing he emphasized, was that the Southern states were back–and the nation should return to the normal processes of government as soon as possible.”(Sandburg, 1954).

His audience was celebrating the end of the war, but his speech

was not delivered in a celebratory tone (Sandburg, 1954). The New York Tribune reported the speech “fell dead, wholly without effect on the audience, “ and furthermore, “it caused a great disappointment and left a painful impression.” Other newspapers noted frequent applause and “silent attention” between the punctuations of applause” (Sandburg, 1954, p. 695) President Lincoln gave his address on April 11, 1865 and Vice President Andrew Johnson received the presidentʼs death announcement on April 15, 1865 (Richardson, 1897). The announcement reads as follows: " " " "

Abraham Lincoln, President of the United States, was shot by an "assassin last evening at Ford's Theater, in this city [Washington, D.C.), "and died at the hour of twenty-two minutes after 7 o'clock (Richardson , 1897, p.284).

Despite bloodshed marking the Civil Warʼs duration and Lincolnʼs

death marking the end of the war, the thirteenth amendment had passed. Slavery had become illegal. Justice (mišpāṭ) was being restored to America. The nation now promoted equity and harmony (D. N. Freedman et al. (Eds.), 1992).

61

A posse ad esse non valet consequentia: Technology available during the Civil War In order to understand exactly how information regarding the war was sent from the rhetor to his audience, we will look at the available technological communication media. When we ask “what is technology?” we are asking about its essence (Heidegger, 1977).

Inquiry regarding technology should yield two answers: “One says: Technology is a means to an end. The other says: Technology is human activity" (Heidegger, 1977,p. 4). Technology is a combination of the the greek word for art and the greek word for systematic study (Grant, 1986, p.11). It refers to "the whole apparatus of instruments made by man and placed at the disposal of man for his choice and purposes" (Grant, 1986, p.19). Few people think of technology as studying art; however, the word does refer to the art created by humanity. This art is ever-advancing and can be used in which ever means the artist chooses. Nevertheless, just because something can be, it does not follow that it should be (a posse ad esse non valet consequentia) (Grant, 1986, p.34). It is our duty now, as it was the duty of those during the Civil War, to use technology for humanityʼs betterment and not our demise. Good is a subjective term. In explaining the post-technological world's ambiguity surrounding what is good, Grant observes that people correlate that which has purpose with goodness(Grant, 1986, p.43).

62

When Grant claims technology as art that ought to be used towards accomplishing good, he speaks in agreement with Platoʼs purpose of oratory: " " " " " " " "

A rhetorician is capable of speaking effectively against all comers, whatever the issue, and can consequently be more persuasive in front of crowds about–to cut a long story short– anything he likes. Nevertheless, the fact that heʼs capable of getting people to think less highly of doctors and their fellow professionals doesnʼt mean that he has to do so. Just like any competitive skill, rhetoric should be used when morally appropriate” (1994, 457a,b).

As this thesis argues that the internet is the most effective

technological communication medium available to date, we will look at its capability to promote movements which are morally appropriate. I will argue that the internet is a medium conducive to mišpāṭ.

During the Civil War, Americaʼs limited technology and vast land yielded slow, difficult communication (Donald 1973). It was not until the 1860s that newspapers were widely circulated (Campell, Martin, & Fabos, 2008). However, by the end of the Civil War there were forty different slavery-opposing newspapers in circulation (2008).

Newspapers circulated very slowly. It took a minimum of two weeks for a New York newspaper to arrive in Detroit (Donald, 1973). Until 1889, the media sources available were limited to books, newspapers, magazines, and very basic radio systems (Campell, Martin, & Fabos, 2008). The telegraph was invented in 1944 and by the beginning of the Civil War, cables ran from coast to coast,

63

enabling Morse Code messages to be sent quicker than a person could travel (Campell, Martin, & Fabos, 2008). However, telegraphs were not able to send voice or messages to those off of land (Campell et al., 2008). For this reason, many wars on the ocean, continued for months because those fighting had not received the message that the war was over (Campell et al., 2008).

It was not until 1922 that the radio was a popular communication medium (Campell et al., 2008). Since the Civil War took place about sixty years before radio was popularized, it was difficult to send a message to someone afar. In fact, “it took four weeks for the news of the outbreak of the Civil War in 1861 to spread from the Eastern seaboard to San Francisco” (Donald 1973, p.5). This slow communication contributed to technologies failure to be a medium of mišpāṭ.

The Context of Mandelaʼs Speech on His Release From Prison: Pan Africanism refers to the unity of Africans and the elimination of white racial domination from the continent of Africa” and is rooted in African Diaspora (Asante, 2007). During the twentieth century Pan-African Explosion, Africans worked collectively to regain Africa by creating world organizations, while indigenous groups fought colonial repression (Asante, 2007). The Pan-Africanist Congress (PAC) was formed in 1959, with a goal not dissimilar to that of white supremacy: black supremacy (Meredith, 1999). The motto of the

64

PAC was “One Settler, One Bullet” (Meredith, 1999, p. 273). South Africa was drenched in violence. The white counterparts, the Afrikaners, were the National Party in 1948 and responded to the PAC by attributing black revolts to be “orchestrated by the Soviet Union to enable communists to seize control of the country” (Meredith, 1999; J. Hall & J. Kirk (Eds.), 2005). The Afrikaners had formed an identity as Africaʼs “white tribe” as they were the descendants of seventeenth and eighteenth century Dutch settlers (J. Hall & J. Kirk (Eds.), 2005). Their perspective of the PAC enabled then President Botha to declare a state of emergency wherein security forces were given full authority to stop the black populations revolt at all costs (Meredith, 1999). The apartheid regulations were created by the Afrikaner nationalists and existed with the blatant purpose to ensure white supremacy reigned (Meredith, 1999). These laws meant that South Africaʼs black population were labelled communists and were subject to segregation in every arena from “residence, employment, education, public amenities, and politics” in order to secure white supremacy (Meredith, 1999, p.15-16). Furthermore, anyone who publicly opposed the apartheid laws “may be subject to various forms of harassment and threats even within the legal system itself, not to mention the threat of detention, banning and violence by selfstyled vigilantes” (Penna, 1990).

65

Older than the PAC, the African National Congress was formed on January 8, 1912 in South Africa as a means for citizens to “protest the imperial government of Britain against the treatment black Africans received at the hands of the whites” (Asante, 2007, p.268). Nelson Rolihlahla Mandala is native to Transkei, South Africa and was born on July 18, 1918, six years after the ANC ratification (Asante, 2007). He was educated at both the University College of Fort Hare and the University of Witwatersrand and qualified in law in 1942 (Asante, 2007). The ANC continued protesting for a few decades and in 1944 expanded by creating a youth league (Asante, 2007). One of the members of this new, passionate group was twenty-six year old Nelson Mandela (Asante, 2007). Four years later (1948) an Afrikaner political group “voted overwhelmingly for the National Party and this is when the policy called Apartheid entered into the system (Asante, 2007, p. 268).

This policy caused Africans and Indians to be removed from electoral rolls and was the first electoral restriction in Africa based on race or color (Asante, 2007). It was this year that Mandela began to actively engage in political resistance (Asante, 2007). In June 1952, the ANC launched a defiance campaign against the national policy and adopted a Freedom Charter (Asante, 2007).

This charter caused one hundred fifty six ANC members to be arrested in 1956 (Asante, 2007). In 1960, Africans protested

66

peacefully against Pass Laws and the white supremacists killed sixty-nine and injured one hundred and eighty protestors (Asante, 2007). This event is known as the “Sharpeville Massacre” (Asante, 2007). This massacre forced the ANC and PAC to begin meeting privately underground because the Afrikaners banned the groups from the country (Asante, 2007).

The year following the Sharpeville Massacre, Mandela proposed that the ANC form a military wing (Asante, 2007). Mandelaʼs idea was implemented and he was arrested in 1962 (Asante, 2007, p.

274). Two years later, Mandela along with seven other political protestors were sentenced to life in prison (Asante, 2007). He spent his first nineteen years at Robben Island Prison on the island just off of Cape Town, South Africa and the next nine at Pollsmoor Prison in a relatively wealthy area of South Africa near the Tokai Forest. (Asante, 2007).

Figure 2.0 Image 1.0: Nelson Mandelaʼs Prison Locations

While in prison, in the eighties, Mandelaʼs wife Winnie filled his role with the ANC (Asante, 2007). She campaigned tirelessly for his

67

release as Mandela became the ANC始s resistance symbol (Asante, 2007). In 1989, F.W. De Klerk, a more moderate Afrikaner became the leader of the party (J. Hall & J. Kirk (Eds.), 2005). On Feb 18, 1990, De Klerk released Mandela from prison (Asante, 2007; J. Hall & J. Kirk (Eds.), 2005). However, his Speech on His Release From Prison was delivered one week prior to his release, February 11, 1990.

A posse ad esse non valet consequentia: Technology in 1990 By the 1990s, when Mandela spoke, he had a wide variety of communication media available. His speech was broadcast on various television networks and it also could have been communicated via books, newspapers, magazines, radio, music, movies, television, cable, and internet. However, by 2005, only three computers existed for every thousand residents in Africa (Campell, Martin, & Fabos, 2011). Although, even if computers were more popularized, it would have remained difficult for Mandela to use the internet, for web browsers did not come into play until two years after he was released from prison (Campell et al., 2011).

Nevertheless, email was available to a select few in a very limited format (Campell et al., 2011). Print media, television, and radio were all very popular media of the 1990s.

Mandela始s release from prison did not mean the end of apartheid.

It meant a move towards its end. On February 25, the New York

68

Times reported on more South African violence (Wren, 1990). The article claimed that since 1985: " " " " " "

2,500 people have been killed, thousands more displaced and countless homes burned down in fighting between blacks loyal to Inkatha, a Zula political and cultural organization...the killings have not stopped since the congressʼs most famous member, Nelson Mandela was released from prison two weeks ago (Wren, 1990).

Later that month, in an interview with TIME magazine, Mandela

was asked when the the blacks would be free (1990). He answered by stating “I am no prophet. I cannot say” (1990, p.3). Despite, not knowing when apartheid would be lifted, Mandela seemed to believe that international aid would be helpful–if not necessary. He reported in the same interview that he planned on accepting meetings with both President Bush in America and Prime Minister Thatcher in England: Q. Do you plan to accept the invitations to visit President Bush and Prime Minister Thatcher?

A. Oh, yes. Speaking for myself, I will accept the invitations. I have indicated to President Bush that I was honored by his invitation (1990).

Earlier that year, South Africaʼs President F. W. de Klerk unbanned the ANC and the following year the ANC conference was held for the first time since its ban in 1960 and Mandela was elected president of the congress (Asante, 2007). In April 1994, Mandela was appointed the first black president of South Africa (Asante, 2007).

69

Although apartheid took at least four years to be resolved after Mandelaʼs Speech on His Release from Prison, his first address surrounding his release was critical for what would follow.

Supporting activists could have felt that his release was the culmination of their efforts. It was through this speech that Mandela would motivate these activists to press on until apartheid was fully eradicated.

Textual Analysis of Offline Artifacts Purpose: Requests for United Action and Self-sacrifices "

The Gospel of Luke recounts Jesusʼ parable of the Prodigal

son. In this parable, a son took his share of the family estate only to waste it in a foreign land. With no fortune left, he found employment feeding pigs; these pigs ate more than he could afford himself.

Eventually the son realized his fatherʼs servants had a higher quality of life than he. This prompted him to return home and beg his father to hire him to work as a servant. Before he was able to plead with his father, his father “was filled with compassion for him; he ran to his son, threw his arms around him and kissed him”(15:20, HCSB). His father continued celebrating his sonʼs return by treating him as a son–as family. To put it simply, the prodigal son reunited with family when his father treated him as such. He could have been happy to be his fatherʼs slave, but how much better it must have been to be treated as an equal!

70

As earlier acknowledged, both Lincoln and Mandela spoke as a means to motivate their audiences towards national unity and racial equality. Praising those who worked towards ending the Civil War and ensuring that America remained on the road to equality by restoring the Union were the overarching goals of Lincolnʼs Last Public Address. The doctrine preached in this speech is a mutually dependent doctrine asking for united action and self-sacrifice.

Essentially, Lincoln moves quickly from celebrating the end of the war to unfolding a plan to establish national unity. He acknowledges that unity is something no one man can accomplish and, therefore, “no one man has the authority to give up the rebellion for any other man” (Lincoln, 1865, ¶ 2). National equality and reconstruction depends on the nationʼs ability to be mutually dependent. It depends on Lincoln, the rhetor, depending on his audience to act.

Moreover, Lincoln emphasized the need for unity between slave states and free states: “the sole object of the government, civil and military, in regard to those [slave] States is to again get them into that proper practical relation” (1865, ¶ 5). To put it differently, Lincoln saw unifying America as the primary purpose of government. This unity would come through mutual dependence.

Moreover, Lincolnʼs rhetoric sought to unify all races throughout America–regardless of their current involvement in the Union. In terms of the prodigal son, Lincoln wanted the slave states to take

71

their proper position within the nation; he wanted his children back in the family. He believed that by treating all states as equal, slave states would be apt to restore their ties with the Union: " " " "

Finding themselves safely at home, it would be utterly immaterial whether they had ever been abroad. Let us all join in doing the acts necessary to restoring the proper practical relations between these States and the Union (1865, ¶ 5).

This served to justify the united action necessary for national

unity. Union states should treat slave states returning to the Union as prodigal sons.

Furthermore, Lincolnʼs Last Public Address established an attitude conducive to having slave states join the Union by defining the slave states in terms of constituents–not merely one of many states: “Some twelve thousand voters in the heretofore slave-state of Louisiana have sworn allegiance to the Union” (1865, ¶ 7). These were people out of “proper practical relation” needing to return. The act of returning is one of self-sacrifice and unity. Some states must sacrifice their dignity and position during the war to return to national unity via the Union.

Through his discourse Lincoln sought national unity through a mutually dependent doctrine asking for united action and selfsacrifice. The same held true for Mandela. The apparent purposes of Mandelaʼs discourse were: to praise those who, while he was imprisoned, continued the freedom movement to work towards the end of apartheid in South Africa. His numerous praises of others

72

reveal a history of united action. In fact, Mandela credits thirty-two different groups for having made sacrifices to promote unity in South Africa as they together worked towards the ultimate goal of lifting the apartheid laws. When thanking the ANC, Mandela explicitly acknowledges their sacrificial service: “You have sacrificed life and limb in the pursuit of the noble cause of our struggle” (1990, ¶ 7). Nearing the end of his speech, Mandela makes one final call to united action and self-sacrifice: “Universal suffrage on a common votersʼ role in a united democratic and non-racial South Africa is the only way to peace and racial harmony” (1990, ¶ 30). For Mandela, this mutually dependent, doctrine asking for united action and selfsacrifice is the only way to mišpāṭ. This certitude thoroughly aligns with Hofferʼs conception of doctrine: " " " "

The effectiveness of a doctrine does not come from its meaning but from its certitude. No doctrine however profound and sublime will be effective unless it is presented as the embodiment of the one and only truth” (1951, p.79).

In his rhetoric, Mandela also aimed to encourage the masses to

permanently end apartheid; he willed to see war stop and all people living harmoniously: “It [apartheid] has to be ended by our own decisive mass action in order to build peace and security” (1990, ¶ 21). In other words, apartheid divided the nation. Its end meant national unity. Citizens of South Africa needed to depend on each other and act together to reunite their divided country.

73

In this discussion of purpose, I will now identify Hofferʼs conceptions of devil as I see it in both artifacts. In short, Hoffer specifies that when a rhetor targets a single, foreign devil, he in turn motivates his audience to unite, at risk to themselves, in order to destroy that devil. As a member of the the National Union Party, Lincoln opposed the slave states ideologies, but he did not necessarily oppose one single devil. He did, however, oppose one ideology: that the colour of oneʼs skin subjects one man to another.

For Lincoln, the devil was the ideology of slavery and that devil manifested itself in those who opposed the thirteenth amendment and those who opposed the Unionʼs plan to bring slave states into proper relation with the Union. This devil was not foreign in the sense that it came from another nation, but it was foreign in the sense that it differed ideologically from both Lincoln and the audience that gathered in front of the White House to hear the president speak as the war came to a close. Lincoln requested that his audience join with him to bring mišpāṭ to the nation, for he longed for equity and harmony to be restored in America: “Let us all join in doing the acts necessary to restoring the proper practical relations between these States and the Union” (1865, ¶ 5).

Much like Lincoln, Mandelaʼs devil was not foreign in the sense that it originated outside of his own country, but foreign in a sense that its ideology differed from his own. For Mandela, the devil he

74

rallied his audience against were the Afrikaners who asserted domination through the apartheid laws. However, Mandela also sees black africans asserting domination as a devil: “I have fought against white domination and I have fought against black domination” (1990, ¶ 32). Therefore, Mandelaʼs rhetorical devil is racial domination. He asks all people, regardless of their race or home country, to fight against this devil: " " " "

We call on our white compatriots to join us in the shaping of a new "South Africa. The freedom movement is a political home to you too. We call on the international community to continue the campaign to isolate the apartheid regime (1990, ¶ 29).

In sum, both offline artifacts cast racial injustice as devils. Both

rhetors ask their audience to enter into a mutually dependent relationship to restore justice (mišpāṭ) to their respective countries.

Audience: The Central Route to Harmony While the idea of audience seems very straightforward, any given discourse has different types of audiences and different types of audiences require different appeals according to the ELM. To reiterate the information from chapter one, audiences with high interest levels regarding the topic at hand normally will be persuaded by central cues. Peripheral cues are persuasive to those with minimal interest in the topic. With varying audiences, the rhetor may be able to justify his use of central or peripheral cues. First of all, I will discuss Lincoln and Mandelaʼs audiences and then discuss the appropriateness of their chosen routes to persuasion.

75

The actual audience is made up of those who heard the speakerʼs rhetoric. Lincoln's actual audience were Union members in the crowd outside the White House on April 11, 1885. Mandela's were South Africans at his release rally in Cape Town along with those around the globe who tuned into the televised broadcast on February 11, 1990. Both of these crowds were in a celebratory state as the war was ending and the ANC had been unbanned.

Mandela's speech was recorded, so all of the people who have seen a recording of the speech are members of his actual audience. This audience is the easiest to pinpoint, however the implied audience is also identified with little effort. This audience includes those whom the text implies make up the audience (Black, 1970) Union members celebrating the victories of Petersburg and Richmond and, therefore, the end of the Civil War, as well as those who have an issue with Louisianaʼs reconstruction plan were those whom Lincoln's text seemed to cater to. The implied audience were not in agreement with Lincoln. They were celebrating, Lincoln was instructing.

Mandela's text addressed people who were working towards the end of Apartheid, mostly South Africans, but also international supporters: “I extend my warmest gratitude to the millions of my compatriots and those in every corner of the globe who have campaigned tirelessly for my release” (1990, ¶ 3). Towards his

76

conclusion, Mandelaʼs text addresses people abroad: “We call on the international community to continue the campaign to isolate the apartheid regime” (1990,¶ 29). A bit more straightforward way to term the implied audience is to discover who the speech is written for: the target audience. Lincolnʼs speech targeted Union members wanting to see slave states emancipate their slaves, while Mandelaʼs targeted South Africans and international freedom fighters wanting to see the end of apartheid. Both rhetors planned their discourse with people open to seeing their respected nations unified.

The rhetorical audience is determined by identifying those with the capacity to do whatever the rhetor desires (Bitzer, 1968).

Theoretically, Lincoln would likely have been able to gain the support of people who already believed that all Americans are equal, that the Civil War should end, and that slave-states should align themselves with the Union. These people, along with those capable of modifying the exigence, made up Lincolnʼs rhetorical audience. For Mandela, people with a strong belief in equality, discipline, and democracy would fit. These people were likely to persevere until the State of Emergency was lifted and apartheid was fully eradicated.

The rhetorical audience contains only those capable of acting as a result of the rhetorʼs speech. However, the universal audience

77

consists of all reasonable and competent people. This audience was termed by Perelman and Olbrechts-Tyteca's to represent "an imaginary construct comprising all rational, competent people who are to be persuaded only by reference to empirically demonstrable facts or absolute truths" (Bizzel and Herzberg, 2001). The universal audience is a tool to help the rhetor formulate arguments that will be sensible to people capable of reasoning. For both Lincoln and Mandela, the universal audience were people who could follow the logic of equality. Amidst racial hatred, it would have been challenging to logically communicate that all races deserve to have equal rights. If one race has the right to a vote, the other should have the same. In spite of the difficulty in explaining this logic, Lincoln did attempt to do so: " " " " "

The colored man too, in seeing all united for him, is inspired with "vigilance, and energy, and daring, to the same end.

Grant that he desires the elective franchise, will he not attain it sooner by saving the already advanced steps toward it, than by running backward over them? (1865, Âś 7).

The last form of audience we will examine is the Second

Persona or the implied auditor. In his essay, The Second Persona, Edwin Black elaborates on the classical idea of this audience: “he is sometimes sitting in judgment of the past, sometimes of the present, and sometimes of the future, depending on whether the discourse is forensic, epideictic, or deliberative� (1970, p.164). In other words, the Second Persona can be concerned with what

78

happened, what is happening, or what may happen. They can be old or young; they can be in agreement or disagreement with the rhetor (Black, 1970,p.164). The only defining feature of the second persona is ideology: “the network of interconnected convictions that functions in a man epistemically and that shapes his identity by determining how he views the world” (Black, 1970, p.164). Black points out that modern people are not born with their identity, but we are in search of who we should become (1970). Therefore, the Second Persona is the embodiment of the ideology of humanity implied in a rhetorical artifact. Both Lincoln and Mandelaʼs speeches imply that humanity is capable of living in harmony with all people. This ideology is that of mišpāṭ or justice. We see this as both rhetorʼs emphasize their goal of reaching national unity and equality.

Lincoln implies this ideology of harmony by sorrowfully admitting that the nation has not agreed upon plan for reconstruction (1865).

He mourns that Americans are not all equal, and asserts that steps must be taken to ensure Louisiana, as well as other confederate states, remains on the route to unity. For Lincoln, humanity was capable of living in unity and harmony, so he relentlessly advocated for the Thirteenth Amendment because he wanted to see his worldview realized. His Second Persona was racial mišpāṭ.

79

The same applies to Mandelaʼs speech. He begins on a note of harmony: “I greet you all in the name of peace, democracy, and freedom for all” (1990,¶ 1). Throughout his speech we see this ideology implied. Moreover, he explicitly states it twice: “The need to unite the people of our country is as important a task now as it always has been” (1990, ¶ 23) and–even more explicitly–in closing, “I have cherished the ideal of a democratic and free society in which all persons live together in harmony with equal opportunities” (1990, ¶ 32). The notion that people are able to live in harmony is implied in both Lincolnʼs Last Public Address and Mandelaʼs Speech on His Release from Prison. Therefore, both Lincoln and Mandelaʼs Second Persona is one who believes humanity is capable of living together in harmony, if the proper advocacy is presented at the appropriate time.

A common theme throughout both rhetorʼs discourse is that their audience are not living harmoniously, but have sacrificed much towards that end. Therefore, their audiences have a high interest in the topic each rhetor presents. Thus, Lincoln and Mandela should have used central cues to persuade their audience according to the ELM. When appealing to central cues, the quality of arguments is more important than the quantity of arguments.

Lincoln wastes no time expanding on the rhetorical situation of the audience. He briefly acknowledges the cause of celebration,

80

before he begins to unveil the reconstruction plan. He relies on well reasoned logic to build substantial arguments. In the third paragraph of his Last Public Address, Lincoln justifies the reconstruction plan by attributing its creation to a large body of elected leaders: “This plan was in advance, submitted to the then Cabinet, and distinctly approved by every member of it...I received many commendations of the plan, written and verbal; and not a single objection to it” (1865). The argument that those whom Americans have elected to make decisions on their behalf, provides a logical reasoning that the reconstruction plan is a good one. We see strong argument again in the same paragraph when Lincoln reveals his strategy for the reconstruction plan. This argument use of clever, well-thought out logic follows, as it should, the central route to persuasion: " " " "

As bad promises are better broken then kept, I shall treat this as a bad promise, and break it, whenever I shall be convinced that keeping it is adverse to public interest. But I have not yet been so convinced (1865, ¶ 3).

Furthermore, as Lincoln gets to the heart of his goal in

reconstruction he asks questions with obvious answers to highlight the logic in bringing the slave states into proper relation with the Union: " " " "

Still the question is not whether the Louisiana government as stands, is quite all that is desirable. The question is, “Will it be wiser to take it as it is, and help to improve it; or to reject, and disperse it?” “Can Louisiana be brought into proper practical

81

" "

relation with the Union sooner by sustaining it, or by discarding her new State government” (1885, ¶ 6,) In this artifact, Lincoln does not make many arguments. Rather,

he dedicates his time to unpacking the logic of the reconstruction plan for the Slave States which have recently surrendered and have caused the celebratory situation in front of the White House.

Much like Lincoln, Mandela spends a significant amount of time unpacking arguments. However, he does use more peripheral cues than does Lincoln. Mandelaʼs first nineteen paragraphs speak to the rhetorical situation by praising his audiences efforts to date. He dedicates a significant amount of space to the celebratory nature of this event. In fact, he specifically states that he “intends making only a few preliminary comments at this stage” (1990, ¶ 20).

However, his praises and statement serve as both situational appeals (peripheral cues) and quality arguments (central cues). If the purpose of Mandelaʼs speech is as this thesis finds it to be, then Mandelaʼs praises serve as an argument of the importance of unity.

It was unity that ended his lifetime sentence in prison and unity that freed black African political parties such as the ANC and PAC. Furthermore, Mandela justifies only making a few comments by saying that he will make more comments after conferring with the group to which he adheres (1990). Throughout the remainder of his speech, Mandela unpacks his argument that people cannot stop fighting for equality and that united action and self-sacrifice is

82

necessary if their equality goals are to be met. He does not introduce new arguments, but spends his time showing the logic of this argument. For these reasons, I would argue that while Mandela did use peripheral cues, he remained on the central route to persuasion, for the peripheral cues served the purpose of strengthening his argument.

Persona: Rhetorʼs Dependence on Their Audience.

The category of persona refers to “the role adopted by the persuader in making the argument” (Kohrs-Campbell, 2009). In other words, if all of the information about the rhetor were contained within their artifact, what could be known about the rhetor. In his Last Public Address, Lincolnʼs persona was that of a messenger.

He wove Biblical terminology into a speech that clarified his limited authority in the war. This enabled him to disperse the weight of war onto the shoulders of both God and the masses. Through epedeictic prose, Lincoln praises God by remembering His involvement in victories: “He from whom all blessings flow, must not be forgotten.” Furthermore he places the burden of war on the masses by stating: " " " " " "

No one man has authority to give up the rebellion for any other man. We simply must begin with, and mould from, disorganized and discordant elements. Nor is it a small additional embarrassment that we, the loyal people, differ among ourselves as to the mode, manner, and means of reconstruction.

83

In addition to remembering God, Lincoln also praises “those whose harder part gives us the cause of rejoicing,” General Grant, his skillful officers, and brave men, and the Navy. He does not boast in his power, but rather takes on the persona of humility which consequently relieves him from carrying the blame for the atrocities of war. Instead of attributing the dissonance haunting America to his leadership, Lincoln directed the blame to his constituents: “Nor is it a small additional embarrassment that we, the loyal people, differ among ourselves as to the mode, manner, and means of reconstruction.” He is now able to discredit himself for having divided the nation as he confronts the embarrassing nature of being a citizen of a country lacking unity.

Lincolnʼs Last Public Address paints him as a timely man whose primary interest is that of the public: " " " " "

I am considering, and shall not fail to act, when satisfied that action will "be proper... But, as bad promises are better broken than kept, I shall treat this as a bad promise, and break it, whenever I shall be convinced that keeping it is adverse to the public interest. But I have not yet been so convinced.”

In sum, President Lincolnʼs persona in his Last Public Address

is that of a humble Christian messenger who is not responsible for the disunity of America. Mandelaʼs persona in his Speech On His Release From Prison does not vary greatly. This speech characterizes Mandela as a selfless, grateful man who will only act

84

timely and who believes in the power of people united. He is also someone who is well-versed in current affairs.

Mandela introduces his speech with thirty-two sentences of praise to: the citizens of Cape Town, the leaders and members of the African National Congress, combatants of Umkhonto we Sizwe, the South African Communist Party; General Secretary Joe Slovo, The United Democratic Front, The National Education Crisis Committee, The South African Youth Congress, The Transvaal and Natal Indian Congresses and COSATU, The Black Sash, The National Union of South African Students, the working class, religious communities, traditional leaders of South Africa, youth, mothers, wives, sisters, the world community, and his wife and family. Mandela is a humble, servant of the people; he depends on the people. These speeches are self-expressive in the sense that they express Lincoln and Mandelaʼs gratitude and assert their national visions.

Tone: Framing and Priming The tone of Lincoln's speech comes across as hesitant. He refrains from making explicit statements and does not speak if he does not see a productive outcome. Rather than addressing attacks on his character, Lincoln ignores them because he “wish[ed] not to be provoked by which [he] can not properly offer an answer.”

Furthermore, in response to a letter posing the question "whether

85

the seceding States,so called, are in the Union or out of it", Lincoln disregards the question by saying: " " " " "

As it appears to me that question has not been, nor yet is, a practically material one, and that any discussion of it, while it thus remains practically immaterial, could have no effect other than the mischievous one of dividing our friends (Lincoln, 1865).

By refusing to address issues he views as unproductive, Lincoln

creates a tone of uncertainty. The audience has asked the President for answers, but he rejects them by deeming the questions tools to divide friends. This hatred for division and love of unity is rooted in the the book of Proverbs: Whoever conceals an offense promotes love, but whoever gossips about it separates friends (17:9, HCSB). The tone of hate versus love makes for a general tone of hesitancy or, perhaps, uncertainty. However, Lincoln does emphasize his common goal with the audience: " " " "

We all agree that the seceded States, so called, are out of their proper relation with the Union; and that the sole object of the government, civil and military, in regard to those States is to again get them into that proper practical relation.

He is confident that he and his audience share an overarching

goal. Lincoln's attitude towards the audience reveals a tone of hesitancy, yet he conveys confidence regarding the subject of national unity. Again, Lincoln始s tone reveals a certain dependence on his audience. He speaks boldly concerning the idea that the nation is sowing equality goals which should not be uprooted:

86

" " " "

We encourage the hearts, and nerve the arms of the twelve thousand to adhere to their work, and argue for it, and proselyte for it, and fight for it, and feed it, and grow it, and ripen it to a complete success.

Furthermore, Lincoln disregards his audiences differences as

he confidently says he will act with what he sees fit: “I am considering, and shall not fail to act, when satisfied that action will be proper.� His attitude towards the subject of equality is also demonstrated through his positive outlook on the impending rights of coloured people: " " " " "

The colored man too, in seeing all united for him, is inspired with "vigilance, and energy, and daring, to the same end.

Grant that he desires the elective franchise, will he not attain it sooner by saving the already advanced steps toward it, than by running backward over them?

In sum, LincolnĘźs tone shows that his attitude towards his

audience lacks confidence, while his attitude towards the subject does not. In other words, he showed hesitancy to believe that listeners would embrace his confidence regarding the need for unity and equality throughout America.

Although the war had primed his audience to hear a message of unity and reconstruction, they may not have been ready to hear the message during a celebration. Nevertheless, they were interested in the topic at hand. That being said, Lincoln was persuading an audience on the central route. Therefore, he did not need to be attractive to them. His message contents alone would serve as the

87

persuasive factor for a highly interested audience. A tone of uncertainty amidst celebration would not prevent his audience from being persuaded on the central route.

While Lincoln did skip out on priming his audience, he framed the issue of unity in an appropriate manner. Framing looks at subtopics mentioned, the size and placement of an issue, and the narrative form and tone an issue is presented in (Miller, 2004).

Lincoln dedicated the vast majority of His Last Public Address for unity through reconstruction. As already examined, he framed the topic through clearly laid out arguments and a tone that revealed reconstruction to be the only way to unity in America. Lincoln made salient the issue of racial equality and nation unity by framing the issue as he did.

While Lincoln was a bit hesitant towards audience receptivity, Mandela shows a confident attitude towards both his subject and audience–though he does maintain the complexity of apartheid. In his introduction, he thanks many people, showing not only confidence in his audience, but support for the cause: "Your tireless and heroic sacrifices have made it possible for me to be here today, I therefore place the remaining years of my life in your hands.�

Mandela primes his audience through this epedeictic (praise) rhetoric. He is building on the celebratory nature of his release to

88

garner support for united action and self-sacrifice until apartheid is completely eradicated.

Furthermore, Mandelaʼs decision to dedicate the rest of his life to his audience demonstrates his confidence in them. However, he does comment on the dissonance of those divided: “our people are embroiled in political strife.” He does not dwell on the negative; he does not frame the issue negatively. Rather, Mandela moves on to address the common goal of the people: equality mišpāṭ, and/or justice. The rest of his speech unpacks a plan to meet that end.

Therefore, the amount of space he dedicates to unpacking this plan frames the issues as important. He provides listeners with a game plan for negotiating racial equality: “Negotiations on the dismantling of apartheid will have to address the overwhelming demand of our people for a democratic, non-racial and unitary South Africa.”

While, these types of statements reveal Mandela's faith in the people, statements like: “...apartheid has no future” and “We have waited too long for freedom. We can no longer wait.” reveal even stronger confidence in the subject of equality and unity. These absolute statements frame the issue as solvable. Those who unite and sacrifice of themselves for the greater good can solve the problem of racial dominance and inequality. By priming his audience through praise and by focusing on a plan for restoration and unity, Mandela makes salient mišpāṭ.

89

In sum, both Lincoln and Mandela made use of behavioural models of communication in appropriate ways. We know now that these men did lead their nations towards union. America stands united and South Africa no longer bears the weight of apartheid.

Rhetoric was used restore unity to divided nation through the selfsacrifice of mass populations. Both leaders were working with very limited media. While, both used the available tools, had the internet been available their rhetoric could have reached more people much faster. Moreover, they would have had access to a two-way system of communication wherein the audience would have entered into a mutually dependent relationship with the rhetor. According to Hoffer, this is key in promoting self-sacrifice and united action. The internet would have allowed Lincoln and Mandela to hasten miĹĄpÄ áš­ and restore peace, harmony, and justice to their nations in a more effective and timely manner. Nevertheless, through their rhetoric, both employed The Mass Mobilization Framework as they worked towards national unity and racial equality.

90

Chapter 4: Online Mass Movements

91

In Chapter 2, we deconstructed the rhetoric of two offline social advocates in order to see which rhetorical tools were used to persuade their audiences. Both rhetoricians spoke to the masses in order to fuel a fire at risk of burning out. Lincoln始s Last Public Address followed the surrender of the Confederate army and, therefore, the American Civil War. His audience were in a celebratory mode, but Lincoln始s speech served to remind the crowd that the Union始s victory would not be fully realized until the states were once again united. He motivated his audience to continue to advocate for the equality goals of the Union through reconstruction.

Although this speech was successful in refueling activists, the Reconstruction Era was not complete until 1877 and racial equality was not reached until the 1960s (Guelzo, 2012).

Mandela始s Speech on His Release From Prison took place exactly a week prior to his official release. As he acknowledges, his audience had worked relentlessly for his release. However, Mandela used this speech to ensure that the crowd realized that his release did not mean the movement was over; it would not end until apartheid was fully eradicated. This speech motivated advocates to remain engaged until the equality goals were fully realized. Four years later, Mandela became president and apartheid ended.

92

Context of Kony 2012 This chapter will identify and examine the effectiveness of the tools that were deduced from both Lincoln and Mandelaʼs rhetoric to see how they functioned in the fasted spread video on the web, Kony 2012 (Wilson, 2012). In 2004, a small group of activists formed a grass roots advocacy group called Invisible Children (Q&A, 2013, ¶ 2). This organization produced films and motivated young activists to support their mission to end the atrocities of the LRA that originated in Uganda. After nearly a decade of advocacy, some positive change, and exhaustion, IC made one final attempt to garner support to end LRA atrocities. On March 5, 2012, IC posted a video on the web titled Kony 2012. As of now, this film has nearly 100 million views: “Kony 2012 caught fire around the world, and [became] the fastest-growing viral video to date" (Wilson, 2012). According to Canadian business expert James B. Skinner, a viral video is “a short video that viewers email to their friends who, in turn, will email it to others and ultimately millions of viewers” (2012, p. 292 ) However, Facebook is also a medium to spread a video amongst friends (Skinner, 2012, p.292). In just short of half an hour, Kony 2012 introduces viewers to the African rebel group the LRA and asks them to make the LRA leader, Joseph Kony a household name– "not to celebrate him, but to bring his crimes to the light by participating in an event called “Cover the

93

Night” on April 20, 2012 (Invisible Children, 2012). Those who wished to participate in the event were instructed to "make Kony famous" and to “Stop at Nothing” by plastering their cities with visual media of Joseph Kony. The organization provided an abundance of paraphernalia to be purchased on their website and some available for free download. According to Hoffer, the promo merchandise serves to support hope in the future: “for the hopeful can draw strength from the most ridiculous sources of power–a slogan, a word, a button” (1951, p.9). However, IC claims that with “Stop Kony” written on millions of teenage clothing and plastered across every city, Joseph Kony would no longer go unnoticed.

Ignorance could no longer be first-world nationʼs excuse for allowing the warlord his freedom.

Now knowing many of the atrocities of the LRA, it seems absurd to have been unaware of the damage attributed to Konyʼs leadership of the LRA. Before ICʼs involvement in Uganda, their war was unknown to, not only myself, but to the vast majority of the Western world. The film was often criticized for having oversimplified the war; however, for many North Americans, Kony 2012 served as an introduction to the longstanding war between the Holy Spirit Mobile Forces and African National Congress. Over the next few pages I will elaborate on the rhetorical situation of

94

Kony 2012. The rhetorical situation will be derived from Lyod. F. Bitzerʼs definition: Let us regard rhetorical situation as a natural context of persons, events, objects, relations, and an exigence which strongly invites utterance; this invited utterance participates naturally in the situation, is in many instances necessary to the completion of situational activity, and by means of its participation with situation obtains its meaning and its rhetorical character.and nonrhetorical discourse (Bitzer, p.5).

In other words, the rhetorical situation is the exigence that caused the speaker to desire to speak to an audience concerning the subject. Therefore, in looking at the rhetorical situation we will examine the factors external to the artifact that inspired IC to film Kony 2012.

As previously stated, the goal of the creators of Kony 2012 is to end the atrocities of the LRA. This Ugandan political protest group is the offspring of the Holy Spirit Mobile Forces (HSMF) (Joireman et al., 2012). These insurgent groups were formed after the National Resistance Army (NRA) took office under the leadership of Yoweri Museveni (1986). One of his constituents, Alice Auma, the daughter of an Anglican pastor, claimed to be in communication with a messenger (Lakwena) spirit who offered spiritual redemption to those who joined her military-like group opposing the NRA (Bernard, 2007). Auma changed her name to Alice Lakwena and led "Le Movement du Saint Esprit"–which is translated to Holy Spirit Movement (HSM). This insurgent group attracted Northern

95

Ugandan soldiers who had been failing in battle: ex- Acholie (Bernard, 2007). It is widely believed, by both Acholi and Ugandan troops in the South, that Lakwena was capable of casting spells and hearing from spirits (Zucchino, 1987). These spirits may have caused spirit-fearing men and boys to join the HSM because the locals asserted that "anyone who contradicts [Alice] are driven to madness by her curses" (Zucchino, 1987). There was something incredibly persuasive about Alice, for it was not only uneducated people with low-economic statuses that were recruited: "PhD holders and professors shed their science-nourished beliefs for her tales of turning stones into grenades" (The East African, 2007).

Lakwena offered her fighters homemade potions and shea butter to protect them from gunfire, while they fought with exposed torsos, using only sticks which they believed would turn into rifles (Bernard, 2007; Zucchino, 1987). In the October following Museveni's victorious election, the HSM had recruited approximately four thousand rebel soldiers (Gailey, 1981). The rebels charged the capital with their simple weaponry while singing hymns (Gailey, 1981). The Ugandan national military thought this group could be peacefully dissolved; however, the rebels continually exerted violence which stimulated the national army to shoot them down (Gailey,1981). The few that were left fled to the hills, but Alice took refuge in Kenya, where she inaugurated her

96

cousin Joseph Kony as the leader of the HSM (Bernard, 2007; Gailey, 1981; Joireman et al., 2012). Joseph Kony eventually renamed the protest group The Lord's Resistance Army (LRA) and began committing crimes against humanity in 1988 (Bernard, 2007). Lakwena is believed to have lived a more peaceful life in solitude in Kenya before dying in a refugee camp on January 18, 2007 (Bernard, 2007; The East African, 2007).

The official goals of the LRA are unknown, but they definitely have an anti-NRA agenda (Joireman et al., 2012). LRA members have “engaged in a cycle of violence and established patterns of ʻbrutalization of civiliansʼ by acts including murder, abduction, sexual enslavement, mutilation, as well as mass burning of houses and looting of camp settlements” (Cathala, 2005). Joseph Kony, the rebel warlord has been identified by The International Criminal Court (ICC) as one of the ten most wanted criminals in the world.

The ICC issued a warrant for his arrest on July 8, 2005, but the warlord remains free. Many attempts have been made to arrest Kony, but the Ugandan government has never done so successfully. They have had numerous peace talks with Kony, but he has never followed through. Nearing the end of one peace talk, wherein Kony and the LRA deputy commander Vincent Otti has claimed to be in total support of the peace agreement, Kony arranged for commander Abudema to murder Otti (The Monitor,

97

2007; BBC Monitoring Africa, 2007). The commanders who reported Otti dead said that he along with other LRA members were “killed by firing squad and their bodies were left unburied for three days ʻto strengthen Konyʼs spiritʼ” (BBC Monitoring Africa, 2007).

Evidently, Kony is an evil man lacking the ability to reason. One anonymous journalists from the African paper, New Vision, wrote: " " " " "

As a doctor, analyzing the reports of Kony with a psychiatrist colleague, I can come to the conclusion that he has many symptoms of mental illness. Kony has features of a paranoid schizophenia, or at "least of a delusional disorder, with a psychopathic personality (2006, ¶ 3, 4).

Joseph Kony is an unwell, unreasonable man who has

withdrawn from numerous peace talks that would have granted him amnesty. However, the Ugandan government has not been able to eliminate the warlord. IC saw this exigence and took action.

With the goal to bring the LRA atrocities to a permanent end, in 2004 Invisible Children was founded in San Diego, California by Jason Russell, Laren Poole and Bobby Briley (Invisible Children, Q&A , 2013;The Monitor, 2005; Christian Broadcasting Network, 2006). The three classmates at film school at the University of Southern California (The Monitor, 2005; Christian Broadcasting Network, 2006). In 2000, Russell had gone on a church trip to Kenya where he first witnessed the hardships in Africa. He was convinced he had to return to hear the many "untold stories" and convinced Poole and Briley to go with him. The three young men

98

bought a camera from eBay and began their wanderings in Africa (Christian Broadcasting Network, 2006). They contracted both Scabies and Maleria, and were not certain if they would find the story they sought after. Nearing the end of their trip, these three young adults "ventured into the unknown ending in Northern Uganda where they were met face to face with the worst humanitarian crisis ever in their young naive lives” (The Monitor, 2005; Christian Broadcasting Network, 2006). In the forests of Uganda, they had conversations with LRA victims which motivated them to dedicate their lives towards ending the atrocities of the LRA through their videography expertise.

Since 2005 their NGO, IC, has produced twelve films which serve as media to raise awareness and mobilize activists towards the permanent end of LRA atrocities (invisiblechildren.com, 2013).

In addition, IC aims to educate and aid in economic development in an effort to promote mišpāṭ in Uganda through the most advanced technologies (Invisible Children, Q&A , 2013).

A posse ad esse non valet consequentia: Technology in 2012 By 2011, Media included books, newspapers, magazines, radio, music, movies, television, cable ,and internet–which has reached a point wherein much of the world is only a few clicks away (Campell, Martin, & Fabos, 2011, Timeline). Media Convergence allows all media types to be coded in the same way and, therefore, all located

99

in the same place: the internet (Campell et al., 2011, p. 51). For this reason, the internet now serves as a hub for print, film, and audio media. When a doctrine is broadcast over the internet, it has the potential to reach approximately thirty-four percent of the world instantly ("World internet users," 2012). In 2011, seventy-five percent of American households owned at least one computer and eighty percent of adults were online (Campell et al., 2011, p.66).

Realistically, most internet users will not be exposed to the majority of information posted on the web. However–during a panel discussion in 2011–Michael T. Jones, Google`s Chief Technology Advocate, reported that there are “300 million Internet users reading blogs, and 2 billion videos viewed daily on YouTube” (Maruli, 2011). Kenyan human rights worker, Janal Robert Orina commented on the potential of the web: “[The internet] is a way for...the struggle in our country , and the many other countries where there are a lot of human rights abuses, to be brought out into the open” (Campell, Martin, & Fabos, 2011, p. 64).

This is precisely what IC did by premiering Kony 2012 online.

Evidently, the internet is a medium with the potential for a doctrine to reach the masses. Nhaearly 300 million Internet users may be exposed to doctrine as a call to united action, self-sacrifice, and mišpāṭ.

100

In Kony 2012, reference to the capabilities of the internet serve as end caps to the film. It begins and ends with references to the medium. Towards the end of the film IC mentions how the web affects democracy. Political communication is no longer monitored.

The internet enables anyone with internet access to enter into the conversation of political affairs. IC asserts that the system has been turned “upside down” and that people can use the internet to protect each other (2012). The “facebook world” allows seven hundred-fifty million people from all over the country to share ideas (2012). The medium allows good to be accomplished through sharing these ideas: “Joseph Kony was committing crimes for twenty years and no one cared. We care” (2012, p.13-14). In terms of a posse ad esse non valet consequentia (Just because something is does not follow that it should be), IC advocates that the internet is a medium capable of advocating united action and self-sacrifice and that humanity is using it as it should: for our betterment and not our demise (Grant, 1986).

Vimeo is a user-generated website dedicated to sharing the creative work of its members with millions of people around the world (Vimeo, 2013). IC posted their first advocacy video on Vimeo in 2006. It was a recap of an event wherein eighty-thousand people, across one hundred thirty cities, slept outside to raise awareness of the war led by Joseph Kony in Uganda. The video

101

highlighted politicians, youth, and the LRA in an attempt to have people care about the unjust acts in Northern Uganda (Global Night Commute: I Got Soul, 2013).

Prior to Kony 2012 the films IC created were viewed ten thousand times on average. The NGO had no indication that Kony 2012 would achieve the success it did. Friends of mine were in both Indonesia and Israel near the film始s release and reported seeing IC始s symbols and slogans painted in urban areas of even these countries. In an exclusive interview, Russell told Oprah that he expected to take a few days off after launching the documentary; however, within twenty-four hours of its premiere Kony 2012 had a million online views which resulted in Russell participating in seventeen interviews from Los Angeles to New York (Oprah, 2013).

It is clear that Kony 2012 reached a huge audience. Since the premiere, IC has motivated 3.7 million people to sign a pledge to support the efforts to arrest Joseph Kony; have seen fifty-four LRA members surrender; constructed a rehabilitation centre for those affected by the LRA; have organized thousands of youth to lobby at Washington Hill; have installed more Early Warning Radio Networks to protect civilians and convince LRA rebels to surrender; have distributed four hundred thousand deflection fliers which five LRA rebels have had in hand at the time they surrendered (Invisible Children 2012 Annual Report, 2013). These accomplishments are

102

evidence that the video did effectively generate the support of the public and that the public, in turn, influenced the policy agenda.

Kony 2012 is a viral video that has informed millions of internetusers of the atrocities committed by the LRA in guise of the Christian doctrine. This rebel group has put Uganda and other remote areas of Africa under intense oppression for upwards of a quarter of a century and very few first world citizens had any idea before IC broadcast the exigence over the internet. In fact, so little information was available internationally, that the California film students had to wander through Africa looking for a story to find any hint that the LRA had misplaced anyone. It was thought that the more “Famous” Kony was, the more likely his capture would be.

Though he is yet to be found, he is famous and many of the LRA atrocities have ceased. The LRA remains active, but their membership has decreased and ICʼs goal is closer to realization.

Textual Analysis of Online Artifact The Significance of Kony 2012 Now that I have gone over the history behind film, we will now look more closely at the film as a means to explain why Kony 2012 persuaded millions to support efforts to stop Joseph Kony. This will be accomplished by looking at the artifact in the same manner that Mandela and Lincolnʼs artifacts were examined. We will look at the filmʼs purpose, audience, persona, and tone in light of Kohr-

103

Campellʼs theories as well as through the Mass Mobilization Framework. Kony 2012 is a cry for the well-off, democratic pocket of the world to administer mišpāṭ on behalf of those being exploited in remote regions of Africa. IC asks viewers to use the media at their fingertips to administer this justice.

Purpose: International mišpāṭ As IC promotes their goal to end LRA atrocities, they make use of the first unit of analysis. The filmʼs mutually dependent doctrine that asks for united action and self-sacrifice begins to unfold within seconds of hitting play. Kony 2012 is introduced by the idea that all humans have a common humanity: “we share what we love and it reminds us of what we all have in common” (2012, p.1). Viewers are walked through the birth of Russellʼs son, Gavin. This serves the purpose of showing the equality of humanity.

The audience is introduced to those suffering under Joseph Konyʼs war as the film progresses. The three filmmakers talk with Jacob and make him a promise that involves united action: " " " % " " " " " "

Russell: We are also going to everything that we can to stop " them.

Jacob: Okay.

Russell: Do you hear my words?

Jacob: Yes. Russell: Do you know what I mean?

Jacob: Yes. Russell: Huh? Jacob: Yes. Russell: Huh? We are, weʼre going to stop them. Weʼre going to stop them...that promise is not about

104

" "

Jacob or me its also about you... I am about to tell you how we are exactly gonna do it (2012, p.5) Russell made a promise to stop Kony–not only on behalf of

himself and his friends–but on behalf of the nation. Jacob seemed skeptical that Russell would stop the LRA, but Russell used a mutually dependent doctrine that asks for united action and selfsacrifice as a means to fulfill this promise. Russellʼs certainty that Kony can be stopped through united action makes his rhetoric doctrinal in terms of Hofferʼs theories (1951). Twice, Russell explicitly states ICʼs doctrine; ICʼs plan would be the only embodiment of the one and only truth” ( Hoffer, 1951, p.79): " " " "

1.Joseph Kony is invisible. Here is how weʼre going to make him visible. We are going to make Joseph Kony a household name not to celebrate him, but to bring his crimes to light (2012, p.11).

" " " "

2.When citizens by the hundreds of thousands start demanding that our government do something, suddenly it becomes in the national interest of the United States government to respond to this problem (2012, p.12).

In ICʼs second assertion of certitude, they request that viewers

take united, sacrificial action to follow ICʼs plan to make the warlord famous. Agenda-Setting is at play here. IC asks their viewers (public) to adopt IC agenda and, in turn, the audience is directed to ask the policymakers to adopt their agenda. This creates what is commonly known as the domino effect.

105

Figure 3.0 Invisible Children’s agenda affects the policy agenda through the public agenda

Viewers were to asked to follow a specific agenda setting theory proposed by IC. This agenda was presented with certainty that it was the one and only way to end LRA atrocities: “In fact the only way to stop Kony is to show him “weʼre going to arrest you” (2012, p. 8). The media created and distributed by IC would cause a public agenda, which according to Agenda Setting Theory, will cause a policy agenda. To put it in laymanʼs terms, ICs film Kony 2012 needed to persuade viewers to share the perspectives of IC regarding the LRA. Next, viewers who are persuaded that the LRA must be stopped, must then persuade policymakers to adopt the public agenda. The policymakers are the public figures with the capacity and authority to create legislation that enables North Americans to use their resources to bring justice to LRA affected areas. In sum, the purpose of Kony 2012 was to increase the

106

number of supporters of the public agenda through a media agenda. This is turn would affect the policy agenda which would mean that America would send foreign aide to help Uganda capture Joseph Kony.

In addition to the certainty of their doctrine, united action and self-sacrifice are key components of ICʼs rhetoric. The organization asserts that they have and will continue to reverse LRA atrocities regardless of government involvement. The internet enables them to reach the masses and collect funds and talent without mass corporation or government aide. The organization and their supporters were mobilizing the masses towards mišpāṭ as a grass roots movement (2012). Their supporters were mainly youth, but these supporters came together and sacrificed their resources for the betterment of humanity: “All of this was funded by an army of young people who put their money toward their belief in the value of all human life” (2012, p.9). Although ICʼs plan is presented as the one and only route to ending LRA atrocities, they assert that they will do whatever it takes. Their motto is “stop at nothing” and is explained in the last audio clip of the film: “The better world we want is coming. Itʼs just waiting for us to stop at nothing” (2012, p.

14). IC deems self-sacrifice a necessary component of their doctrine. Self-sacrifice will bring “the better world.”

107

Lastly, the devil in ICʼs Kony 2012 is clear: Joseph Kony.

Although IC has Christian roots, they do not reference these in their documentary. Rather than appealing to God, they focus on eliminating this devil, for: “mass movements can rise and spread without belief in a God, but never without belief in a devil” (Hoffer, 1991, p.89) To their North American audience, Kony is clearly foreign. For the most part he was invisible. Few people knew he existed. Furthermore, unlike Lincoln and Mandela, IC target a single person as opposed to a single ideology. They are much more intentional about creating a devil for their audience to ban together to destroy.

The Audience: Millennials Chaim Perelman maintains that “the speaker may choose to ignore certain persons to whom argumentation is actually addressed because they are beyond appeal (Foss, 1991). The actual audience of Kony 2012 consists of the nearly 100 million viewers of the documentary. In a sense, the documentary appeals to a universal audience: all those who are reasonable and competent (Foss,1991). In other words, the film likely would make sense to anyone who is able to reason. However, a careful evaluation of the script reveals that many members of ICʼs universal audience members would not be affected by the video.

According to the ELM, only those who have some minimal degree

108

of interest in the subject at hand, mišpāṭ, are within appeal. That being said, the script of Kony 2012 reveals an implied audience of the Millennials–those born after 1980. This demographic contains those who are most apt to be be persuaded. Perelman defines audience as “the ensemble of those whom the speaker wishes to influence by his argumentation” (Perelman, 1969).

The film targets North Americans who are participating in social networking on the web who will share the video with their friends because these are the ones with the ability to follow the instructions of the documentary. Furthermore, clips of hundreds of thousands of youth are shown throughout the entire film. While millennials may be the primary target audience, Kony 2012 targets social media users in general as he calls attention to celebrities and policymakers–many of which were born before 1980, but all of whom frequently participate in mass communication. These people actively use social networking to get the support of the millions of youth who use the internet as their main source of information.

Furthermore, IC aims for their media agenda to be adopted by their main target demographic, milennials. In turn, IC aims for policy makers and celebrities to adopt the public agenda, which mirrors ICʼs media agenda. Therefore, while the film targets people born before 1980, it does include all people who are part of the two-way communication community of the web. Kony 2012ʻs persuasive

109

efforts exclude those lacking any degree of influence on the internet. This is because the video is only available on the web and is not available for retail purchase. The only way the target audience of Kony 2012 can access ICʼs mass movement rhetoric is through internet sharing.

The rhetorical audience that Kony 2012 addresses are people who can move the cause forward; people who once informed will oppose the LRA. Therefore, the rhetorical audience consists of social networkers, media influencers, government authorities, people who will pledge support for Konyʼs arrest, and people who will fund the effort to end LRA atrocities and rehabilitate those affected by the LRA. The final audience to examine is the Second Persona. Once again, this audience is the personification of an ideology or worldview as Black describes it: “the network of interconnected convictions that functions in a man epistemically and that shapes his identity by determining how he views the world” (1970, p.164).

As was the case for both Lincoln and Mandela, IC conveys the belief that humanity is capable of living harmoniously; mišpāṭ can be achieved. We see this as IC emphasize their ideology of international unity and equality reflected by the belief from Bono “where you live shouldnʼt determine whether you live” (2012, p.9).

110

The concept of Second Persona, as it pertainʼs to IC audience, is international mišpāṭ.

With these audiences in mind, IC should have made appeals on both the central and peripheral routes of persuasion in order to maximize persuasiveness for such a broad audience. Those interested in mišpāt, particularly with an international bend, would have required central cues such as strong, well developed arguments to be persuaded to support IC. However, those who were not already interested in international mišpāṭ, may have been persuaded by the rhetorical situation itself: components from the film. These could include music, creative videography, source attractiveness, and any other factor relating to the environment the video was in or viewed within. This discussion of the ELM will continue after we look at persona.

Persona: The Attractive Rhetor If the only available source of knowledge about the filmʼs director and star were from Kony 2012, Jason Russell would be seen as a father to a healthy son, an actor, and a cinematographer whose job is to make the world a better place. He would be known as a man whose life was changed in 2002 when he met Jacob, an LRA victim, on a trip to Uganda. Furthermore, Kony 2012 casts Russell as someone not afraid to ask tough question such as: “Did you see your brotherʼs murder?” and “Do you want to stay on

111

Earth?� (2012, p.3,4). Moreover, he would be known as a comforter, a man of his word, authoritative, confident in humanityʟs will for human rights, politically involved, creative, a believer in the impossible, and culturally informed. He is attractive in terms of the ELM. His diversity and the way by which he highlights his interests cast him as a relatable rhetor, whom viewers may wish to know more about.

As stated in Chapter One, the Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM) claims that an audience with little knowledge, interest, or personal relevance to an issue will likely be persuaded via the peripheral route, while those with highly involved with the subject at hand will follow the central route. Most North Americans have not witnessed LRA atrocities; most have never had contact with Ugandan refugees or with members of the LRA. It then follows logic that most viewers would have low involvement with the LRA. Therefore, the ELM would suggest that persuasion occur primarily through peripheral cues. However, those with a high interest in justice and foreign aide may be very much interested in hearing of foreign crisis and how they may help. That being said, Kony 2012 did appeal to both audiences, but primarily targeted those on the peripheral route; those whose main source, or sole source, of knowledge on the LRA, Joseph Kony, and child soldering would come from Kony 2012.

112

Although the film is composed of many clips that appeal to both routes, we will look at only two examples. The first example relates to source attractiveness. In this use of the word I am referring to any attribute of the source that is aligned with the interest of the audience; be it hobbies, fashion sense, hometown, or credentials.

Source attractiveness only serves as a central argument if it can be attached to message content (Petty et al., 1987, p.244). In other words, if the subject is beauty or attractiveness, attractiveness of the source contributes to persuasion on the central route. Kony 2012 is not appealing to an issue wherein attractiveness is pertinent to the message, so source attractiveness serves chiefly to persuade those with a low interest in social justice, particularly for victims of the LRA. In most cases, people with low elaboration likelihood are persuaded remarkably more if the source is attractive (Petty et al., 1987, p.245). However, people on both routes process arguments with greater caution when they are made by attractive people (Petty et al. 1987, p.245). Therefore, source attractiveness serves both groups in that it facilitates processing for either or both central and peripheral cues.

The film director introduces himself and his son: “My name is Jason Russell and this is my son Gavin. He loves jumping on the trampoline, being a Ninja and dancing� (Kony 2012, 2:37). The audio is paired with photos of the two smiling together. Both have

113

healthy looking physiques, shiny blonde hair, fashionable attire, and nicely toned voices. Furthermore, in Kony 2012, Russell reveals that he and his son enjoy filmmaking, play, and dancing. Their physical appearance and interests make them attractive. The information in this clip is seemingly irrelevant to the LRA, yet it appeals to those on the peripheral route by drawing them in via situatonal information. Furthermore, the attractiveness of Jason and Gavin will cause the information presented to be more carefully assessed by all viewers (Petty et al.,1987,p. 245).

In addition to information about Russell and his son serving as peripheral cues, Gavinʼs birth primes the audience to hear the forthcoming message of equality: “Every single person in the world started this way, he didn’t chose where or when he was born but because he’s here he matters” (Kony 2012, p. 1).

This information is given before the value of international children is introduced, thus, the audience is able to recall this information when critiquing information presented about international aide. In other words, the information of Gavinʼs value primes viewers of Kony 2012 to accept the ideology that humanity has inherent value: “where you live should no longer determine whether you live” (2012, p.9).

Next, we will look at a clip wherein an action plan is presented by layering arguments. In this two minute clip, approximately nine

114

arguments are made. To highlight some earlier comments, those on the central route are persuaded by small quantities of welldeveloped arguments, while those on the peripheral route are persuaded by the quantity of arguments: " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " "

1) [Joseph Kony] is not famous 2) Heʼs invisible. Joseph Konyʼs invisible. Here is how weʼre going to make him visible.

3) We are going to make Joseph Kony a household name not to celebrate him, but to bring his crimes to the light.

And we are starting this year, 2012.

4) We are targeting 20 culture makers and 12 policymakers to use their power for good. Letʼs start with the 20 culture makers.

5) Celebrities, athletes, and billionaires have a loud voice, and what they talk about spreads instantly.

6) If our goal is to get Konyʼs name known, the known should join us. We are targeting 20 of the most diverse and influential culture makers to speak out about Kony and make him famous.

" " " " " " "

7) [Jason Russell]Then weʼre going after policymakers — the ones that have the authority to see Kony captured.

8) They decide if the advisers stay or leave.

9) So we need to remind them that in this election year of fighting and name-calling, no matter what side youʼre on, this is something we can all agree on. (Kony 2012, 22:52-24:12)

" " " "

[Man]Oprah. [Woman]Mark Zuckerberg.

[Man #2]Ryan Seacrest. [Women #2]Bono.

As you can read, the clip above appeals to both groups of people by presenting solid arguments amongst numerous arguments. The mere quantity of arguments will serve to persuade those who are less interested in Uganda criminal activity, while

115

using strong arguments will appeal to those who are interested.

However, those with high elaboration likelihood are more likely to criticize the arguments. Perhaps by proposing that making Joseph Kony famous will not help or that the public agenda cannot influence the media or policy agendas.

The Tone: Confident and Urgent In reference to rhetoric, tone is defined as the “rhetorʼs attitude towards the subject and towards the audience” (Kohrs-Campbell, 2009). Tone is used here to describe how IC primed their audience to accomplish their purpose and how they framed the issue presented. The tone that Jason Russell uses in the film is marked by urgency. He sees a deadline that needs to be met and presents a plan to meet it: " If we succeed we can change the course of human history but time is running out, to level with you this movie expires on December 31st, 2012 and itʼs only purpose is to stop the Rebel Group, The LRA and their leader Joseph Kony and Iʼm about to tell you how we are exactly going to do it” (Invisible Children, 2012).

Russellʼs general tone towards the subject is that it can be resolved through a straightforward, overly optimistic plan; a doctrine that is mutually dependent doctrine that asks for united action and self-sacrifice.

Jason Russell never voices doubt regarding the ability of his audience to exert change. He continually gives examples of ordinary people banding together for change. In reference to the

116

audience, he adopts a communal tone. Everyone must work together to end LRA atrocities; it is not a solo mission. He takes this tone from the beginning of the documentary. First of all, Russell explains the two-way communication system which is overruling policy agendas and which places rhetors and audiences in mutually dependent relationships: " " " " "

Right now their are more people on Facebook than there were on the planet two-hundred years ago. Humanities greatest desire is to belong and connect...and this connection is changing the world. Governments are trying to keep up...The game has new rules (2012, p.1).

Russellʼs tone of certainty regarding the power of mutually

dependent communication continues when he promises Jacob “Weʼre going to stop them.” Russell never discussed how he alone would stop the rebel group, but always how the audience would join with him to bring mišpāṭ to the world and make it a better place.

While Russell maintains the necessity of collaboration, he does assume the leadership position; he never asks the audience to participate in plotting to arrest Joseph Kony. Rather, Russell simply informs the audience of “the exact” action necessary to stop Kony.

This tone assumes that audience is instructable. In sum, through his tone, Russell conveys the urgency of the plan, but remains calm and confident that the audience can follow ICʼs plan immediately to end LRA atrocities.

117

While tone refers to the attitude the rhetor takes, priming and framing are concerned with the “way materials are organized to gain attention, develop a case, and provide emphasis” (KohrsCampbell, 2009). IC primes their audience by starting with how a lofty idea can play out and then gives the audience a specific way to act on that idea on a smaller scale. Kony 2012 begins with an expansion of detail to clarify a point: “Nothing is more powerful than an idea, whose time has come, whose time is now” (Invisible Children, 2009). This type of priming permeates throughout the film.

Russell begins by discussing the power of the Internet to spread ideas and ends with a detailed plan of how to use the internet to stop the LRA. Russell continuously starts with an idea that a child is able to understand and builds on that idea until it becomes a very specific, educated idea. For example, he begins the documentary with a general idea that everyone on this planet is important. He brings the issue to a more relatable point when he claims that his life as a California university graduate is equally as valuable as the life of LRA victim Jacob.This structure is also seen as he explains his career path to his son Gavin and then precedes to describe the gory details of his job to the audience. He tells Gavin about why Joseph Kony needs to be stopped in the most basic way possible.

With his son off the set, Russell describes the horrible details of the atrocities led by Joseph Kony. Gavin states that if people were to

118

see Konyʼs photo, then Kony would no longer be invisible. It is perhaps the most basic solution to Konyʼs “invisibility.” Russell uses Gavinʼs reaction to prime the audience to accept the challenge that Joseph Kony can be stopped if the world knows who he is. Making Kony visible will in turn result in IC achieving the goal of international mišpāṭ. He continues building on this elementary idea until ICʼs plan is entirely unveiled. In Kony 2012 the most attention is directed at a plan to stop Kony. Therefore, this plan is what is most salient in the documentary.

Conclusion: Mass Mobilization is Most Successful on the Web Kony 2012 was a successful rhetorical attempt to make Joseph Kony, the leader of the LRA known. Millions of people were persuaded to share ICʼs video and to advocate for government support. Though Joseph Kony has yet to be found, many rebels have surrendered. Much of Uganda–particularly LRA affected communities–are becoming safer. The film moved the world closer to the change IC aims to see: LRA atrocities permanently ended. In doing this, IC used an attractive rhetor with a good ethos: someone who had a history with the organization and who was culturally relevant. They appealed to an audience who knows how to spread a message quickly and made it easy for them to spread the message via social networking. The internet required the rhetors to depend on their audience and gave the audience a sense of

119

empowerment. Thus, the two parties depended on each other, which in Hofferʼs and Shepherdʼs ideology, is key in motivating the masses towards united action and self-sacrifice. Furthermore, Kony 2012 was communicating an international problem to citizens in their home country. This made it possible to target a single, foreign devil who viewers could concentrate all their hatred towards. The tone was confident and urgent. This gave the audience confidence to participate and motivated them to act immediately–not passively.

Lastly, Kony 2012 uses priming to frame the issue of international mišpāṭ through ending LRA atrocities. This is accomplished as IC begins with a simple idea a child is able to understand and unpacks it until the audience has a comprehensive understanding of the idea. From this we can conclude that Russell did not need to show his audience an academic, complete analysis of the entire history of the LRA for them to support ICʼs mission. Rather, Russell ʼs ethos, sense of urgency, direct plan, confidence in the rhetorical audience, and ICʼs priming strategy are all factors that made Kony 2012 a persuasive documentary.

120

Chapter 5: Comparing Online and Offline Mass Mobilization

121

Implications Kony 2012 holds the record for the most views in the shortest amount of time (Wilson, 2012). Since itʼs release ICʼs goal of seeing LRA atrocities permanently end is coming closer to realization as they have gained the support of millions of activists and been able to install technology in LRA affected communities that has not only protected civilians, but has resulted in numerous LRA surrenders (Invisible Children 2012 Annual Report, 2013) As we saw through the offline artifacts examined, IC employed behavioral communication tools in their rhetoric. The organization was able to adapt these persuasive tactics to the web and the web strengthened them. This medium put the rhetor and audience in a more mutally-dependent relationship which promoted united action and self-sacrifice.

With Kony 2012 as the example for successful web-based mass mobilization, the information in “Raising Mišpāṭ” may be used as a resource to create media that promotes activism. Joseph Kony did become famous in 2012, meeting the goal of IC in creating the film. The public agenda took on ICʼs media agenda. However, as 2012 is gone, Joseph Kony has yet to be arrested. Regardless, many remain hopeful that Joseph Kony will be arrested in the near future. However, this thesis is not looking at how effective policymakers are in ending LRA violence. Rather, it examines how

122

effective the rhetoric of Kony 2012 is in stimulating action in the world beyond the web. The message about the LRA communicated

by IC has clearly impacted millions and arguable the LRA has been weakened as a result.

In conclusion, web-based mobilization is current and of interest to the field of Communications. If you spend some time sifting through internet search engines, you will quickly realize that no other activism films have had such enormous success. Invisible Children appears to be the first web-based activism organization to have global success. This in-depth study of the differences and overlapping structures of online and offline mass movements serves to aid future filmmakers in maximizing the effectiveness of their projects; particularly films calling people to advocate for others. Furthermore, this thesis serves as a rhetorical guide to using social media to rally people as advocates of social justice.

This careful study of the director of successful mass movements with and without the internet provides insight as to how future filmmakers may plot videos should they wish to “go viral” and achieve world-wide activity in reaching the communication goals of the filmmaker.

The Mass Mobilization Framework is made up of the established behavioral models of communication: Eric Hofferʼs conception of doctrine and devil, The Elaboration Likelihood Model,

123

and Agenda Setting Theory. This framework incorporates persuasive, rhetorical tools that all serve to further organizational goals of self-sacrifice and unity. More specifically, the tools used for persuasion across all three artifacts were: a doctrine that requires the audience and rhetor to depend on each other and that demands self-renunciation and unification with a collective whole; a devil; appeals to peripheral and/or central routes of persuasion; and salience through framing and priming. These elements motivated those dealing with the reconstruction which followed the Civil War, as well as those fighting for equality and justice during the apartheid regime of the 1990s in South Africa. These units of analysis which form the Mass Mobilization Framework were successful offline and translate effectively to the web. However, the web allows the tools to reach more people, much faster. As a result, the media agenda is able to influence the public agenda more effectively. In turn, the policy agenda is influenced with greater haste and advocacy is accomplished with greater efficiency as it enables those with the power and resources to do miĹĄpÄ áš­ on behalf of those suffering from oppression.

124

References Acton, L. (1877). The history of freedom in antiquity . Acton, history '

of freedom and other essays.

Asante, M. K. (2007). The history of africa: The quest for eternal harmony. New York: Routledge.

Barnhart, Clarence L., and Robert K. Barnhart, eds. (1986). "

"Doctrine." TheWorld Book Dictionary

BBC Monitoring Africa. (2007, November 22). Uganda; former lra deputy commander otti "confirmed" dead. BBC Worldwide Monitoring Bernard, P. (2007, 01 21). Alice lakwena: "prophĂŠtess", et ancienne dirigeante d'un mouvement ougandais de rĂŠbellion. Le Monde Bethell, T. (2012). Eric hoffer: The longshoreman philosopher. (p.

314, 323). Stanford, CA: Hoover Institution Press.

Bitzer, L. (1968). The rhetorical situation. Philosophy & Rhetoric, 1 (1), 1-14. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/ 40236733.

Bizzell, P., & Herzberg, B. (2001). The rhetorical tradition: Reading from classical times to present. (2nd ed., p. 31). Boston: Bedford Books of St. Martin's Press.

Black, E. (1970). The second persona. The Quarterly Journal of Speech, 56(3), 161-172.

125

Browne, S. (1994). "like gory spectres": Representing evil in Theodore Weld's american slavery as it is. Quarterly Journal of Speech , 80, 277-292.

Campbell, R., Martin, C., & Fabos, B. (2008). Media & culture: An introduction to mass communication. (6 ed., p. 119, 120).

Boston: Bedford/St.Martin's.

Campbell, R., Martin, C., & Fabos, B. (2011). Media & culture: An introduction to mass communication. (7 ed., p.64, Timeline). Boston: Bedford/St.Martin's.

Cathala, B. (2005) International Criminal Court. International Criminal Court. Warrant of Arrest for Joseph Kony Issued on 8 July 2005 As Amended on 27 September 2005.

Retrieved from <http://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/doc/ doc97185.pdf> Children, Invisible. "Move:DC." Kony 2012 . Invisible Children. Web. 10 Dec 2012. <http://invisiblechildren.com/movedc/>.

Children, Invisible, prod. Global Night Commute: I Got Soul. 2006.

Film. 30 Jan 2013. <http://vimeo.com/channels/ invisiblechildren/3765452>.

Children , Invisible. "Questions and Answers ." invisiblechildren.com. N.p.. Web. 30 Jan 2013. <http:// invisiblechildren.com/about/q-and-a/]

126

Christian Broadcasting Network. (2006). Jason russell: Filming the 'invisible children'.

CBC News. (2012, March 07). Can social media help hunt down a ugandan warlord?. Retrieved from http://www.cbc.ca/ news/yourcommunity/2012/03/can-social-media-help-huntdown-a-ugandan-warlord.html Donald, D. H. (1978). Liberty and union: A compelling analysis of '

the crisis of popular government during the Civil War and

'

reconstruction era . (p.5). Lexington, Massachusetts: D.C.

"

Heath and Company.

Fiske, S. T., & Taylor, S. E. (1991). Social cognition. (2 ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill Humanities/Social Sciences/ Languages.

Foss, Sonja. (2009). Rhetorical Criticism, Exploration And Practice.

(3. 63.) Long Grove: Waveland Press Inc. Foss, S. K., Foss, K. A., & Trapp, R. (1991). Contemporary perspectives on rhetoric. (2nd ed.). Prospect Heights, Illinois: Waveland Press, Inc. Gailey, H. A. (1981). History of africa from 1945-present. (Vol. 3).

Malabar, Florida: Kreiger Publishing Co., Inc. Gienapp, W. E. (1997). Book reviews. The Journal of southern '

history , 63(3),651.Â

127

Guelzo, A.C. (2012). Fateful Lightning: A New History of the Civil '

War and Reconstruction 445-513. New York: Oxford

"

University Press.

Grant, G. (1986). Technology & justice. Toronto, Ontario: House of ' Anansi Press Limited. Â Hart, R. P. (1971). The rhetoric of the true believer .Speech Monographs, XXXVIII(4), 261.

Heidegger, M. (1977). The question concerning technology and '

other essays (William Lovitt, Trans.). New York, Hagerstown,

"

San Francisco.

Hoffer, E. (1951). The true believer . (pp. 7-97). New York: Harper & Row, Publishers, Inc. Hunt, L. (2012). The religion of the heart: Leigh hunt. Tyger " Valley, "

South Africa: Ulan Press.

International Criminal Court. Situation in Uganda. Retrieved from "

<http://www.icc-cpi.int/EN_Menus/ICC/Situations and

"

Cases/Situations/ Situation ICC 0204/Pages/situation

"

index.asp&xgt;

Joireman, S. F., Sawyer, A., & Wilhoit, J. (2012). A different way home: Resettlement patterns in northern uganda. Political Geography, 31(4), 197-204.

Justice In (1992). D. Freedman (Ed.), The Anchor Bible '

Dictionary (Vol. 3, p. 1127). New York, NY: Doubleday.

128

Kelly, A. H., & Harbison, W. A. (1970). The american constituition.

(4 ed., p. 1091). New York: W.W. Norton & Company.

Killingsworth, M. J., & Palmer, J. S. (1995). The discourse of "environmentalist hysteria". Quarterly Journal of Speech , 81(1), 1-3.

Kingswood University. (n.d.). Statement of faith. Retrieved from http://www.kingswood.edu/about/statementoffaith.php Kohrs Campbell, K., & Schultz Huxman, S. (2009). The rhetorical act: Thinking, speaking, and writing critically. Belmont, CA: Cengage Learning.

Larrabee, Harold, A. (1952). Hoffer, eric. the true believer (book "

review),.Humanist , (12). p.240

Lincoln, A. (1865, April 11). Last Public Address. Speech presented at the White House, Washington, D.C. Mandela, N. (1990, February 11). Speech on His Release From '

Prison. Speech presented at Victor Verster Prison, South

"

Africa.

Mandela, N. (1990, February 26). []. Time interview with mandela., "

Retrieved from

"

http://www.sahistory.org.za/archive/interview-mandela-time-

"

february-26-1990

Maruli, A. (2011, May 26). Google earth demonstrates how technology benefits civil society, govt . Antara News. Retrieved from

129

"

http://www.antaranews.com/en/news/71940/google-earth-

"

demonstrates- how-" technology-benefits-ris-civil-society-govt

McCombs, M. E., & Shaw, D. L. (n.d.). Twenty-five years in the marketplace of ideas. (1993). Journal of Communication, 43(2), 58-67.

McCombs, M. E., & Shaw, D. L. (n.d.). The agenda-setting function of mass media . (1972). Journal of Communication, 176-187.

Meredith, M. K. (1999). Coming to terms: South africa's search for truth . (p. 273). New York: PublicAffairs Miller, K. (2004). Communication theories:perspectives, processes, and contexts. (2nd ed. ed.). McGraw Hill.

New Vision. (2006, August 5). Uganda; Kony始s bandwagon. Africa News North america: 1800-1877. In (2005). J. Hall & J. Kirk (Eds.), History of the World: Earliest times to the present day (p.

465). North Dighton, MA: World Publications Group, Inc. O'Connor, T. H. (1972). The disunited states: The era of ccivil war and reconstruction. (p. 198). New York: Harper & Row, Publishers, Inc. Penna , D. R. (1990.). Apartheid, the law and reform in south africa.

Africa Today , 37(1), p.9 doi: 00019887

130

Perelman, C., & Olbrechts-Tyteca, L. (1969). The new rhetoric: A treatise on argumentation. Notre Dame Press.

Petty, R. E., Kasmer, J.A., Haugtvedt C.P., Cacioppo, J.T. (1987).

Source and message factors in persuasion: A reply to stiff's critique of the elaboration likelihood model.Communication Monographs, 54.

Plato (1994). Gorgias. (R. Waterfield, Trans.). Walton Street, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Quintillian (1922). The institutio oratoria of Quintillian (H.E. Butler, Trans.). Cambridge, MA : Harvard University Press.

Pryor, J. H., Eagan, K., Blake, L. P., Hurtado, S., Berdan, J., & Case, M. H. (2012). The american freshman: National norms for fall 2012. (University of California)Retrieved from http://www.heri.ucla.edu/monographs/ TheAmericanFreshman2012-Expanded.pdf  Pryor, J. H., Hurtado, S., DeAngelo, L., Sharkness, J., Romero, L. "

C., Korn, W. S., & Tran, S. (2008). The american freshman:

'

national norms for fall 2008 . (Major research project,

University of California) Retrieved from "

http://www.heri.ucla.edu/PDFs/pubs/TFS/Norms/

"

Monographs/"TheAmericanFreshman2008.pdf

Pryor, J. H., Hurtado, S., Saenz, V. B., Santos, J. L., & Santos, J. L. "

(n.d.). "Los Angeles, CA , Retrieved from

131

"

http://heri.ucla.edu/PDFs/" 40TrendsManuscript.pdf

Richardson, J. D. (1897). Abraham lincoln In A compilation of the '

messages and papers of the presidents 1789-1897 (Vol. VI,

"

p. 5, 284). Authority "of Congress.

Rushing, J. H., & Frentz, T. S. (1980). The deer hunter: Rhetoric of "

the warrior. Quarterly Journal of Speech , 66, 392-394.

Russel, J. (Director). (2012, March 05). Kony 2012 [Web].

Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch? v=Y4MnpzG5Sqc Sandburg, C. (1974). Abraham lincoln: the prairie years and the war years. (One Volume ed., pp. 692-695). New York: Harcourt, Brace & World, Inc. Shepherd, G. J. (2006). Communication as transcendence.

Communication as–;perspectives on theory, 22.

Smith, C. (2003) The Secular Revolution: Power, Interests, and Conflict in the Secularization of American Public Life.

Berkley, Los Angeles, London: University of California Press.

Smith, E. C., & Zurcher, A. J. (1958). Dictionary of american politics . New York, NY: Barnes & Noble, Inc. Skinner, J. R. (2012). Business plan business reality: Starting your own business in canada. (3rd ed., p. 292,310). Toronto, ON: Pearson Canada.

132

Stiff, J. B. (1986). Cognitive processing of persuasive message cues: A meta-analytic review of the effects of supporting information on attitudes. Communication Monographs, 53.

Tapscott, D. (2009). Grown up digital, how the net generation is changing your world. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Professional, 244.

The East African . (2007, January 30). Uganda; how an army armed with sticks and stones nearly overran kampala .

Africa News The Monitor. (2005, May 4). Uganda; northern youth narrate plight in invisible children. Africa News The Monitor. (2007, May 15). Uganda; kony promises to comply with peace deal. Africa News Vatz, R. E. (n.d.). The myth of the rhetorical situation. (1973).

Philosophy & Rhetoric, 6(3), 154-157.

Vimeo, . "About." vimeo.com. N.p.. Web. 30 Jan 2013. <http:// vimeo.com/about>.

Vinovskis, M. A. (1989). The journal of american history , 76(1), " '

Palmer, C. A. (1998). Slave resistance. Reviews in American History, 26, p.371-374.

Wilson, R. (2012, March 09). 'konyʼ surprises as record-setting viral . New York Times

133

Winfrey, O. (Producer). (2012). Jason russell: Why the kony 2012 phenomenon was like a tsunami read more. [Web Video].

Retrieved from http://www.oprah.com/own-oprahs-nextchapter/Jason-Russell-on-Kony-2012-Going-Viral-Video World internet users and population statistics. (2012, June 30). " "

Retrieved from http://www.internetworldstats.com/stats.htm

Wren, C. S. (1990, February 25). Tribal feuds won't let up in south africa's east. The New York Times, p. 16.

Zucchino, D. (1987, October 14). The spell of death cast by uganda's mystery priestess. The Advertiser (1958). E. C. Smith & A. J. Zurcher (Eds.), Dictionary of American Politics (p. 259). New York: Barnes & Noble, Inc. (1972). The Lincoln Library of Essential Information (35th ed., Vol. 1, pp. 1-1004). Columbus Ohio: The Frontier Press Company  Â

134

APPENDIX I: Lincoln始s Last Public Address Two days after the surrender of Confederate General Robert E. Lee's army, a jubilant crowd gathered outside the White House, calling for President Lincoln. Reporter Noah Brooks wrote, "Outside was a vast sea of faces, illuminated by the lights that burned in the festal array of the White House, and stretching far out into the misty darkness. It was a silent, intent, and perhaps surprised, multitude."

"Within stood the tall, gaunt figure of the President, deeply thoughtful, intent upon the elucidation of the generous policy which should be pursued toward the South. That this was not the sort of speech which the multitude had expected is tolerably certain."

Lincoln stood at the window over the building's main door, a place where presidents customarily gave speeches. Brooks held a light so Lincoln could read his speech, while young Tad Lincoln grasped the pages as they fluttered to his feet. The speech introduced the complex topic of reconstruction, especially as it related to the state of Louisiana. For the first time in a public setting, Lincoln expressed his support for black suffrage. This statement incensed John Wilkes Booth, a member of the audience, who vowed, "That is the last speech he will make." A white supremacist and Confederate activist, Booth made good on his threat three days later.

We meet this evening, not in sorrow, but in gladness of heart. The evacuation of Petersburg and Richmond, and the surrender of the principal insurgent army, give hope of a righteous and speedy peace whose joyous expression can not be restrained. In the midst of this, however, He from whom all blessings flow, must not be forgotten. A call for a national thanksgiving is being prepared, and will be duly promulgated. Nor must those whose harder part gives us the cause of rejoicing, be overlooked. Their honors must not be parcelled out with others. I myself was near the front, and had the high pleasure of transmitting much of the good news to you; but no part of the honor, for plan or execution, is mine. To Gen. Grant, his skilful officers, and brave men, all belongs. The gallant Navy stood ready, but was not in reach to take active part.

By these recent successes the re-inauguration of the national authority -- reconstruction -- which has had a large share of thought from the first, is pressed much more closely upon our attention. It is fraught with great difficulty. Unlike a case of a war between independent nations, there is no authorized organ for us to treat with. No one man has authority to give up the rebellion for any

135

other man. We simply must begin with, and mould from, disorganized and discordant elements. Nor is it a small additional embarrassment that we, the loyal people, differ among ourselves as to the mode, manner, and means of reconstruction.

As a general rule, I abstain from reading the reports of attacks upon myself, wishing not to be provoked by that to which I can not properly offer an answer. In spite of this precaution, however, it comes to my knowledge that I am much censured for some supposed agency in setting up, and seeking to sustain, the new State government of Louisiana. In this I have done just so much as, and no more than, the public knows. In the Annual Message of Dec. 1863 and accompanying Proclamation, I presented a plan of reconstruction (as the phrase goes) which, I promised, if adopted by any State, should be acceptable to, and sustained by, the Executive government of the nation. I distinctly stated that this was not the only plan which might possibly be acceptable; and I also distinctly protested that the Executive claimed no right to say when, or whether members should be admitted to seats in Congress from such States. This plan was, in advance, submitted to the then Cabinet, and distinctly approved by every member of it. One of them suggested that I should then, and in that connection, apply the Emancipation Proclamation to the theretofore excepted parts of Virginia and Louisiana; that I should drop the suggestion about apprenticeship for freed-people, and that I should omit the protest against my own power, in regard to the admission of members to Congress; but even he approved every part and parcel of the plan which has since been employed or touched by the action of Louisiana. The new constitution of Louisiana, declaring emancipation for the whole State, practically applies the Proclamation to the part previously excepted. It does not adopt apprenticeship for freed-people; and it is silent, as it could not well be otherwise, about the admission of members to Congress. So that, as it applies to Louisiana, every member of the Cabinet fully approved the plan. The message went to Congress, and I received many commendations of the plan, written and verbal; and not a single objection to it, from any professed emancipationist, came to my knowledge, until after the news reached Washington that the people of Louisiana had begun to move in accordance with it. From about July 1862, I had corresponded with different persons, supposed to be interested, seeking a reconstruction of a State government for Louisiana. When the message of 1863, with the plan before mentioned, reached New-Orleans, Gen. Banks wrote me that he was confident the people, with his military co-operation, would reconstruct, substantially on that plan. I wrote him, and some of them to try it; they tried it, and the result is known. Such only has

136

been my agency in getting up the Louisiana government. As to sustaining it, my promise is out, as before stated. But, as bad promises are better broken than kept, I shall treat this as a bad promise, and break it, whenever I shall be convinced that keeping it is adverse to the public interest. But I have not yet been so convinced.

I have been shown a letter on this subject, supposed to be an able one, in which the writer expresses regret that my mind has not seemed to be definitely fixed on the question whether the seceding States, so called, are in the Union or out of it. It would perhaps, add astonishment to his regret, were he to learn that since I have found professed Union men endeavoring to make that question, I have purposely forborne any public expression upon it. As appears to me that question has not been, nor yet is, a practically material one, and that any discussion of it, while it thus remains practically immaterial, could have no effect other than the mischievous one of dividing our friends. As yet, whatever it may hereafter become, that question is bad, as the basis of a controversy, and good for nothing at all--a merely pernicious abstraction.

We all agree that the seceded States, so called, are out of their proper relation with the Union; and that the sole object of the government, civil and military, in regard to those States is to again get them into that proper practical relation. I believe it is not only possible, but in fact, easier to do this, without deciding, or even considering, whether these States have ever been out of the Union, than with it. Finding themselves safely at home, it would be utterly immaterial whether they had ever been abroad. Let us all join in doing the acts necessary to restoring the proper practical relations between these States and the Union; and each forever after, innocently indulge his own opinion whether, in doing the acts, he brought the States from without, into the Union, or only gave them proper assistance, they never having been out of it.

The amount of constituency, so to speak, on which the new Louisiana government rests, would be more satisfactory to all, if it contained fifty, thirty, or even twenty thousand, instead of only about twelve thousand, as it does. It is also unsatisfactory to some that the elective franchise is not given to the colored man. I would myself prefer that it were now conferred on the very intelligent, and on those who serve our cause as soldiers. Still the question is not whether the Louisiana government, as it stands, is quite all that is desirable. The question is, "Will it be wiser to take it as it is, and help to improve it; or to reject, and disperse it?" "Can Louisiana be

137

brought into proper practical relation with the Union sooner by sustaining, or by discarding her new State government?"

Some twelve thousand voters in the heretofore slave-state of Louisiana have sworn allegiance to the Union, assumed to be the rightful political power of the State, held elections, organized a State government, adopted a free-state constitution, giving the benefit of public schools equally to black and white, and empowering the Legislature to confer the elective franchise upon the colored man. Their Legislature has already voted to ratify the constitutional amendment recently passed by Congress, abolishing slavery throughout the nation. These twelve thousand persons are thus fully committed to the Union, and to perpetual freedom in the state--committed to the very things, and nearly all the things the nation wants--and they ask the nations recognition and it's assistance to make good their committal. Now, if we reject, and spurn them, we do our utmost to disorganize and disperse them.

We in effect say to the white men "You are worthless, or worse--we will neither help you, nor be helped by you." To the blacks we say "This cup of liberty which these, your old masters, hold to your lips, we will dash from you, and leave you to the chances of gathering the spilled and scattered contents in some vague and undefined when, where, and how." If this course, discouraging and paralyzing both white and black, has any tendency to bring Louisiana into proper practical relations with the Union, I have, so far, been unable to perceive it. If, on the contrary, we recognize, and sustain the new government of Louisiana the converse of all this is made true. We encourage the hearts, and nerve the arms of the twelve thousand to adhere to their work, and argue for it, and proselyte for it, and fight for it, and feed it, and grow it, and ripen it to a complete success. The colored man too, in seeing all united for him, is inspired with vigilance, and energy, and daring, to the same end.

Grant that he desires the elective franchise, will he not attain it sooner by saving the already advanced steps toward it, than by running backward over them? Concede that the new government of Louisiana is only to what it should be as the egg is to the fowl, we shall sooner have the fowl by hatching the egg than by smashing it? Again, if we reject Louisiana, we also reject one vote in favor of the proposed amendment to the national Constitution. To meet this proposition, it has been argued that no more than three fourths of those States which have not attempted secession are necessary to validly ratify the amendment. I do not commit myself against this, further than to say that such a ratification would be questionable, and sure to be persistently questioned; while a ratification by threefourths of all the States would be unquestioned and unquestionable.

138

I repeat the question, "Can Louisiana be brought into proper practical relation with the Union sooner by sustaining or by discarding her new State Government?

What has been said of Louisiana will apply generally to other States. And yet so great peculiarities pertain to each state, and such important and sudden changes occur in the same state; and withal, so new and unprecedented is the whole case, that no exclusive, and inflexible plan can be safely prescribed as to details and colatterals [sic]. Such exclusive, and inflexible plan, would surely become a new entanglement. Important principles may, and must, be inflexible.

In the present "situation" as the phrase goes, it may be my duty to make some new announcement to the people of the South. I am considering, and shall not fail to act, when satisfied that action will be proper.

139

APPENDIX II: Mandela始s Speech on His Release From Prison

Nelson Mandela`s Address to a rally in Cape Town on his release from prison 11 February 1990 Friends, comrades and fellow South Africans.

I greet you all in the name of peace, democracy and freedom for all.

I stand here before you not as a prophet but as a humble servant of you, the people. Your tireless and heroic sacrifices have made it possible for me to be here today. I therefore place the remaining years of my life in your hands.

On this day of my release, I extend my sincere and warmest gratitude to the millions of my compatriots and those in every corner of the globe who have campaigned tirelessly for my release.

I send special greetings to the people of Cape Town, this city which has been my home for three decades. Your mass marches and other forms of struggle have served as a constant source of strength to all political prisoners.

I salute the African National Congress. It has fulfilled our every expectation in its role as leader of the great march to freedom.

I salute our President, Comrade Oliver Tambo, for leading the ANC even under the most difficult circumstances.

I salute the rank and file members of the ANC. You have sacrificed life and limb in the pursuit of the noble cause of our struggle.

I salute combatants of Umkhonto we Sizwe, like Solomon Mahlangu and Ashley Kriel who have paid the ultimate price for the freedom of all South Africans.

I salute the South African Communist Party for its sterling contribution to the struggle for democracy. You have survived 40 years of unrelenting persecution. The memory of great communists like Moses Kotane, Yusuf Dadoo, Bram Fischer and Moses Mabhida will be cherished for generations to come.

140

I salute General Secretary Joe Slovo, one of our finest patriots. We are heartened by the fact that the alliance between ourselves and the Party remains as strong as it always was.

I salute the United Democratic Front, the National Education Crisis Committee, the South African Youth Congress, the Transvaal and Natal Indian Congresses and COSATU and the many other formations of the Mass Democratic Movement.

I also salute the Black Sash and the National Union of South African Students. We note with pride that you have acted as the conscience of white South Africa. Even during the darkest days in the history of our struggle you held the flag of liberty high. The large-scale mass mobilisation of the past few years is one of the key factors which led to the opening of the final chapter of our struggle.

I extend my greetings to the working class of our country. Your organised strength is the pride of our movement. You remain the most dependable force in the struggle to end exploitation and oppression.

I pay tribute to the many religious communities who carried the campaign for justice forward when the organisations for our people were silenced.

I greet the traditional leaders of our country - many of you continue to walk in the footsteps of great heroes like Hintsa and Sekhukune.

I pay tribute to the endless heroism of youth, you, the young lions.

You, the young lions, have energised our entire struggle.

I pay tribute to the mothers and wives and sisters of our nation. You are the rock-hard foundation of our struggle. Apartheid has inflicted more pain on you than on anyone else.

On this occasion, we thank the world community for their great contribution to the anti-apartheid struggle. Without your support our struggle would not have reached this advanced stage. The sacrifice of the frontline states will be remembered by South Africans forever.

My salutations would be incomplete without expressing my deep appreciation for the strength given to me during my long and lonely years in prison by my beloved wife and family. I am convinced that your pain and suffering was far greater than my own.

141

Before I go any further I wish to make the point that I intend making only a few preliminary comments at this stage. I will make a more complete statement only after I have had the opportunity to consult with my comrades.

Today the majority of South Africans, black and white, recognise that apartheid has no future. It has to be ended by our own decisive mass action in order to build peace and security. The mass campaign of defiance and other actions of our organisation and people can only culminate in the establishment of democracy. The destruction caused by apartheid on our sub-continent is incalculable. The fabric of family life of millions of my people has been shattered. Millions are homeless and unemployed. Our economy lies in ruins and our people are embroiled in political strife. Our resort to the armed struggle in 1960 with the formation of the military wing of the ANC, Umkhonto we Sizwe, was a purely defensive action against the violence of apartheid. The factors which necessitated the armed struggle still exist today. We have no option but to continue. We express the hope that a climate conducive to a negotiated settlement will be created soon so that there may no longer be the need for the armed struggle.

I am a loyal and disciplined member of the African National Congress. I am therefore in full agreement with all of its objectives, strategies and tactics.

The need to unite the people of our country is as important a task now as it always has been. No individual leader is able to take on this enormous task on his own. It is our task as leaders to place our views before our organisation and to allow the democratic structures to decide. On the question of democratic practice, I feel duty bound to make the point that a leader of the movement is a person who has been democratically elected at a national conference. This is a principle which must be upheld without any exceptions.

Today, I wish to report to you that my talks with the government have been aimed at normalising the political situation in the country.

We have not as yet begun discussing the basic demands of the struggle. I wish to stress that I myself have at no time entered into negotiations about the future of our country except to insist on a meeting between the ANC and the government.

Mr De Klerk has gone further than any other Nationalist president in taking real steps to normalise the situation. However, there are further steps as outlined in the Harare Declaration that have to be met before negotiations on the basic demands of our people can

142

begin. I reiterate our call for, inter alia, the immediate ending of the State of Emergency and the freeing of all, and not only some, political prisoners. Only such a normalised situation, which allows for free political activity, can allow us to consult our people in order to obtain a mandate.

The people need to be consulted on who will negotiate and on the content of such negotiations. Negotiations cannot take place above the heads or behind the backs of our people. It is our belief that the future of our country can only be determined by a body which is democratically elected on a non-racial basis. Negotiations on the dismantling of apartheid will have to address the over- whelming demand of our people for a democratic, non-racial and unitary South Africa. There must be an end to white monopoly on political power and a fundamental restructuring of our political and economic systems to ensure that the inequalities of apartheid are addressed and our society thoroughly democratised.

It must be added that Mr De Klerk himself is a man of integrity who is acutely aware of the dangers of a public figure not honouring his undertakings. But as an organisation we base our policy and strategy on the harsh reality we are faced with. And this reality is that we are still suffering under the policy of the Nationalist government.

Our struggle has reached a decisive moment. We call on our people to seize this moment so that the process towards democracy is rapid and uninterrupted. We have waited too long for our freedom. We can no longer wait. Now is the time to intensify the struggle on all fronts. To relax our efforts now would be a mistake which generations to come will not be able to forgive. The sight of freedom looming on the horizon should encourage us to redouble our efforts.

It is only through disciplined mass action that our victory can be assured. We call on our white compatriots to join us in the shaping of a new South Africa. The freedom movement is a political home for you too. We call on the international community to continue the campaign to isolate the apartheid regime. To lift sanctions now would be to run the risk of aborting the process towards the complete eradication of apartheid.

Our march to freedom is irreversible. We must not allow fear to stand in our way. Universal suffrage on a common voters` role in a united democratic and non-racial South Africa is the only way to peace and racial harmony.

143

In conclusion I wish to quote my own words during my trial in 1964.

They are true today as they were then: `I have fought against white domination and I have fought against black domination. I have cherished the ideal of a democratic and free society in which all persons live together in harmony and with equal opportunities. It is an ideal which I hope to live for and to achieve. But if needs be, it is an ideal for which I am prepared to die.`

144

APPENDIX III: Script of Kony 2012 NOTHING IS MORE POWERFUL THAN AN IDEA WHOSE TIME HAS COME WHOSE TIME IS NOW [Jason Russell] Right now there are more people on Facebook than there were on the planet 200 years ago. Humanities greatest desire is to belong and connect and now we see each other. We hear each other: Grandpa I love you I love you Why – why wonʼt it take a picture?

[Jason Russell] Source: LYBIO.net We share what we love and it reminds us of what we all have in common.

Alive and well after 7 1/2 days.

If you believe in yourself you will know how to ride a bike. Rock nʼ roll.

So not technically your device is on. Can you tell – oh itʼs exciting.

[Jason Russell] And this connection is changing the way the world works. Governments are trying to keep up.

Now we can taste the freedom. (FACE BOOK) [Jason Russell] And older generations are concerned.

Many people are very concerned about tomorrow Cause it could get worse next year. (THE COMING COLLAPSE?) [Jason Russell] The game has new rules. The next 27 minutes are an experiment but in order for it to work you have to pay attention. *baby cries* Oh heʼs cute. Heʼs really cute. Wow! Congratulations. Oh I can hear him.

[Jason Russell] Every single person in the world started this way, he didnʼt chose where or when he was born but because heʼs here he matters.

145

Weʼve been waiting for you.

You made it.

[Jason Russell] My name is Jason Russell and this is my son Gavin. He loves jumping on the Trampoline, being a Ninja and dancing.

[Jason Russell] What are you doing?

[Gavin] Source: LYBIO.net Making a snow angel.

[Jason Russell] How do you do that?

[Gavin] You do this: de de de – de de de [Jason Russell] Just like his dad, he likes being in movies. ACTION!

[Gavin] Look up people look up – RUN!!~~ Itʼs a bomb.

[Jason Russell] And he likes making movies.

[Gavin] Daddy watch this. I think we got the video.

[Jason Russell] But he was born into a pretty complicated world. And as a dad I want him to grow up in a better world than I did. And because of the course of events in my life I see a way to get there. It has become my job.

[Jason Russell] Who are you to end a war? Iʼm here to tell you: Who are you, not to?

[Jason Russell] Hey Gavin, whatʼs up?

[Jason Russell] Years, before Gavin was born the course of my life was changed entirely by another boy. And whose this right here?

146 [Gavin] Jacob.

[Jason Russell] Whoʼs Jacob?

[Gavin] Jacob is our friend in Africa.

[Jason Russell] Source: LYBIO.net Itʼs almost been ten years since Jacob and I became friends.

Itʼs okay theyʼre nice, they are different than sharks.

[Jason Russell] But when my friends and I first met him in Uganda in central Africa it was in very different circumstances. He was running for his life.

[Jason Russell] Ah – you go to school here?

[Jacob] Yes [Jason Russell] Thatʼs how you know English so well.

[Jacob] I know [Jason Russell] Ya [Soldier] (Hello) [Jason Russell] How many nights have you stayed here?

[Jacob] Yes [Jason Russell] Source: LYBIO.net Thatʼs how you know English so well.

[Soldier] You are making our work here very difficult. You stop that.

147 [Jason Russell] The night I met Jacob he told me what he and other children in Northern Uganda were living through.

[Jacob] We worry the rebels when they arrest us again then they will kill us. My brother tried to escape then they killed him using a panga. They cut his neck.

[Jason Russell] Did you see it?

[Jacob] I saw.

(We fear that if we sleep at our home we can be abducted by the rebels because our home is far away from town. They will catch us then they will take us there in the bush. We come here to save our life.)

[Jason Russell] I cannot believe that.

(You cannot believe it?)

(This has been going on for years?)

(If that happened one night in America it would be on the cover of Newsweek) What is it that you want to be when you grow up?

[Jacob] Source: LYBIO.net For me, I wanted to be a lawyer but I donʼt have money to pay my school fees so that I learn and then become a lawyer.

[Jason Russell] After spending a few weeks with Jacob, he told me something that I would never forget.

[Jacob] It is better when you kill us and if possible, you can kill us, you kill us. For us, we donʼt want now to stay – because [Jason Russell] You donʼt want to stay on earth?

[Jacob] We are only two, no one is taking care of us. We are not going to school, so

148 [Jason Russell] You would rather die than stay on earth?

[Jacob] Yes. [Jason Russell] Now, even now?

[Jacob] Even now. How are we going to stay in our future? You see.

[Jason Russell] He told me more about his brother and what he would say to him if he were still alive.

[Jacob] Source: LYBIO.net I love you. But now I miss you. So it is better when we meet we are going to – even if – we are not going to meet but we may meet in heaven, you see? So it is better. I will not talk much, it will start something because if I saw my brother once again. I donʼt (cries) [Jason Russell] Hummh?

[Jacob] (cries) [Jason Russell] Thatʼs okay, Jacob, itʼs okay [Jacob] (cries) [Jason Russell] Source: LYBIO.net Everything in my heart told me to do something and so I made him a promise.

[Jason Russell] We are also going to do everything that we can to stop them.

[Jacob] Okay.

[Jason Russell] Do you hear my words?

[Jacob] Yes. [Jason Russell] Do you know what I mean?

149 [Jacob] Yes. [Jason Russell] Huh? [Jacob] Yes.

[Jason Russell] Source: LYBIO.net Huh? We are, weʼre going to stop them. Weʼre going to stop them. I made that promise to Jacob, not knowing what that would mean but now I do.

Over the past 9 years, I have fought to fulfill it. And the fight has led me here, to this movie your watching because that promise is just not about Jacob or me its also about you, and this year 2012 is finally the year we can fulfill it, and if we succeed we can change the course of human history but time is running out, to level with you, this movie expires on DECEMBER 31st 2012 and itʼs only purpose is to stop the Rebel Group The L.R.A. (Lordʼs Resistance Army) and their leader Joseph Kony. And Iʼm about to tell you how we are exactly gonna do it.

KONY 2012 [Jason Russell] So the thing is – my son Gavin – Iʼve never really explained to him what I do, he knows I work in Africa but he doesnʼt know what the wars about or who Joseph Kony is. So Iʼm gonna explain it to him for the first time, today. Thatʼs what weʼre doing.

[Jason Russell] So Gav, are you ready?

[Gavin] Source: LYBIO.net Ya [Jason Russell] Iʼm gonna ask you some questions [Gavin] Ok

150 [Jason Russell] And you can just look at me and answer the questions, today.

[Gavin] Iʼm kind of nervous.

[Jason Russell] What do I do for a job?

[Gavin] You stop the bad guys from being mean.

[Jason Russell] Who are the bad guys?

[Gavin] Um… [Jason Russell] Do you know where they – [Gavin] “Star Wars” people.

[Jason Russell] “Star Wars” people? [Gavin] Yeah.

[Jason Russell] - Those are the bad guys?

[Gavin] Yeah.

[Jason Russell] Can I tell you the bad guyʼs name?

[Gavin] Yeah.

[Jason Russell] This is the — This is the guy, Joseph Kony.

[Gavin] Heʼs the bad guy?

[Jason Russell] Yeah. -Whoʼs this? [Gavin] Jacob.

151 [Jason Russell] Joseph Kony — He has an army, okay? And what he does is he takes children from their parents and he gives them a gun to shoot and he makes them shoot and kill other people.

[Gavin] But theyʼre not gonna do what he says because theyʼre nice guys, right?

[Jason Russell] Yeah, they donʼt want to do what he says, but he forces them to do bad things. What do you think about that?

[Gavin] Itʼs sad.

[Jason Russell] Mm. I couldnʼt explain to Gavin the details of what Joseph Kony really does. Because the truth is, Kony abducts kids just like Gavin. For 26 years, Kony has been kidnapping children into his rebel group, the LRA… …turning the girls into sex slaves… …and the boys into child soldiers. He makes them mutilate peopleʼs faces. And he forces them to kill their own parents. And this is not just a few children. Itʼs been over 30,000 of them.

And Jacob was one of those children. As if Konyʼs crimes arenʼt bad enough, he is not fighting for any cause, but only to maintain his power.

He is not supported by anyone, and he has repeatedly used peace talks to rearm and murder again and again. This is the head prosecutor for the International Criminal Court. In 2002, when the court was started, their job was to find and demand the arrest of the worldʼs worst criminals. Although there are a lot of warlords, murderers, and dictators in the world, the perversity of Konyʼs crimes made him first on the courtʼs list.

Kony is the first guy indicted by the ICC but the crimes basically are crimes against humanity and war crimes committed against the civil population including murder, sexual slavery, rapes, abductions. We need to plan how to arrest Kony. Start to plan and it has to be serious. In fact, the only way to stop Kony is to show him “weʼre going to arrest you” What do you think we should do about him?

[Gavin] Source: LYBIO.net We should stop him. {Guy} The criminal here is Kony, we should stop him and then solve other problems

152 [Jason Russell] We should stop who?

[Gavin] Him. [Jason Russell] Itʼs obvious that Kony should be stopped. The problem is, 99% of the planet doesnʼt know who he is. If they knew, Kony would have been stopped long ago.

Black guys– J:When my friends and I came home from Uganda, we thought that if the government knew, they would do something to stop him. But everyone in Washington we talked to said there is no way the United States will ever get involved in a conflict where our national security or financial interests arenʼt at stake.

[Prendergast] No administration — Republican, Democrat, Obama, Bush, Clinton, doesnʼt matter — would do enough because itʼs simply not an importantenough issue on the radar screen of American foreign policy.

[Jason Russell] Since the government said it was impossible, we didnʼt know what else to do but tell everyone we could about Jacob and the invisible children.

Show this movie to as many people as possible in such a way that we canʼt be ignored. And when we did, people were shocked, and their awareness turned into action. We started something — a community.

[Woman] I have friends that have been living in this conflict their entire life. Fight for that because that is what is gonna change this world, and that is what defines us.

[Jason] We got creative, and we got loud.

[All] Itʼs not over! Itʼs not over! Itʼs not over!

[Jason] And as the LRA began to move into other countries, Jacob and other Ugandans came to the U.S. to speak on behalf of all people suffering because of Kony. Even though Uganda was relatively safe, they felt compelled to tell the world that Kony was still out there and had to be stopped. We built a community around the idea that where you live shouldnʼt determine whether you live. We were committed to stop Kony and rebuild what he had destroyed. And because we couldnʼt wait for institutions or governments to step in, we did it ourselves with our time, talent, and money. So we rebuilt schools. We created jobs. And we built

153 an early warning radio network on the front line of the war to protect villages from rebel attacks.

[Man] To update real time whatʼs happening on a war zone 8,000 miles away.

[Jason Russell] Source: LYBIO.net All of this was funded by an army of young people who put their money toward their belief in the value of all human life. They gave a few dollars a month of what little they had to a program called TRI and proved that a bunch of littles could make a big difference. And as a result, the unseen became visible.

- army cries♪ Stars hide your fires ♪ ♪ These here are my desires ♪ ♪ And I wonʼt give them up to you this time around ♪ ♪ And so ♪ ♪ But you… ♪ ♪ …rightfully mine ♪ student interview: “this is what the world should be like” [Jason Russell] So, with hundreds of thousands of people with us, we went back to Washington, D.C., and we met with congressmen and senators one by one on both sides — Republicans, Democrats — and they all agreed with us. Joseph Konyʼs crimes had to be stopped.

[Inhofe] With all the problems that are out there, none is more severe than one that — that mutilates and takes the lives of little kids.

[Davis] These young members of the Invisible Children Organization know that no child should live in fear of being abducted or killed.

[McGovern] So they were determined to become their voice. They realized that these African children and families were invisible to Washington policymakers.

So they decided to make them visible.

[Jason Russell] And what I was told would never happen suddenly became possible.

“In furtherance of the Congressʼs stated policy, I have authorized a small number of U.S. forces to deploy to Central Africa to provide assistance to

154 regional forces that are working toward the removal of Joseph Kony from

the battlefield. Sincerely, Barack Obama.”

[Cheers And Applause] [Rice] Through advice and assistance — not putting Americans into combat — to help the countries of the region end this threat once and for all. And that was a worthwhile investment.

[Cheers And Applause] [Ululating] [Jason Russell] After eight years of work, the government finally heard us. And in October of 2011, a hundred American advisers were sent into Central Africa to assist the Ugandan army in arresting Kony and stopping the LRA. It was the first time in history that the United States took that kind of action because the people demanded it. Not for self-defense, but because it was right. Weʼve come so far. But Kony is still out there. Heʼs recently changed his tactics, making it even more difficult to capture him. _interviews_And international support could be removed at any time. Itʼs hard to look back on some parts of human history. Because when we heard about injustice, we cared, but we didnʼt know what to do. Too often we did nothing. But if weʼre going to change that, we have to start somewhere, so weʼre starting here with Joseph Kony because now we know what to do.

155

Here it is. Ready? In order for Kony to be arrested this year, the Ugandan military has to find him. In order to find him, they need the technology and training to track him in the vast jungle. Thatʼs where the American advisers come in. But in order for the American advisers to be there, the U.S. government has to deploy them. Theyʼve done that, but if the government doesnʼt believe that people care about arresting Kony, the mission will be canceled. In order for the people to care, they have to know. And they will only know if Konyʼs name is everywhere. This is the dream.

Kony arrested for all the world to see, and the abducted children returned home. -Hereʼs the biggest problem. [Gavin] Source: LYBIO.net Yeah.

[Jason Russell] Do you want to know what it is?

[Gavin] Yeah. [Jason Russell] Nobody knows who he is.

[Gavin] Nobody knows, but — but I know who he is because I see him on this picture right now.

[Jason Russell] Heʼs not famous. Heʼs invisible.

Joseph Konyʼs invisible. Here is how weʼre going to make him visible. We are going to make Joseph Kony a household name not to celebrate him, but to bring his crimes to the light. And we are starting this year, 2012. We are targeting 20 culture makers and 12 policymakers to use their power for good. Letʼs start with the 20 culture makers. Celebrities, athletes, and billionaires have a loud voice, and what they talk about spreads instantly.

If our goal is to get Konyʼs name known, the known should join us. We are

156 targeting 20 of the most diverse and influential culture makers to speak out about Kony and make him famous.

[George Clooney] I want id like indicted war criminals to enjoy the same level of celebrity as me. that seems fair thats our objective is to just shine a light on it.

[Jason Russell] If our goal is to get Konyʼs name known then known should join us. We are targeting 20 of the most diverse and influential culture makers to speak out about Kony and make him famous.

[Man] Oprah. [Woman] Mark Zuckerberg.

[Man #2] Ryan Seacrest. [Women #2] Bono.

[Jason Russell] Then weʼre going after policymakers — the ones that have the authority to see Kony captured. They decide if the advisers stay or leave. So we need to remind them that in this election year of fighting and namecalling, no matter what side youʼre on, this is something we can all agree on.

[Feingold] If a senator or congressman notices 25 phone calls on any issue on any given day, it is noted.

[Predergast] When citizens by the hundreds of thousands start demanding that our government do something, suddenly it becomes in the national interest of the United States government to respond to this problem.

[Jason Russell] Weʼve identified the 12 policymakers that could change the game regarding Kony,

157 so weʼre targeting them.

On our Website, weʼve made it easy to write them directly, call them, meet with them, and get their attention.

If my son were kidnapped and forced to kill, it would be all over the news.

So we are making Kony world news by redefining the propaganda we see all day, every day that dictates who and what we pay attention to.

[Fairey] A lot of people feel powerless to communicate their ideas. They think that: Okay, you know, Iʼm not a corporation. I donʼt own my own magazine or news station. I just donʼt have any say. But seeing what Iʼve done, I think itʼs empowered a lot of people to realize that one individual can make an impact. And I actually want to demystify and say, “Here are these really simple tools. Go out and rock it.”

[Jason Russell] Source: LYBIO.net And thatʼs just what we intend to do. ♪ I canʼt stop ♪ [Jason Russell] Our goal is to change the conversation of our culture and get people to ask, “Who is Joseph Kony?” We have printed hundreds of thousands of posters, stickers, yard signs, and fliers that are right now, today, being put up in major cities all over the world. We have thousands of “Kony 2012″ bracelets that we want everyone to wear this year only. Each bracelet has a unique I.D. number. Input that number and you enter the mission to make Kony famous. You can geotag your posters and track your impact in real

158 time. Everything you need is in a box called the Action Kit. It has two bracelets — one for you and one to give away.

And if you want to help fund our lifesaving programs, donate a few dollars a month through TRI and you can have the Action Kit for free.

Start making Kony famous today, but all of these efforts will culminate on one day — April 20th — when we cover the night. This is the day when we will meet at sundown and blanket every street in every city till the sun comes up. We will be smart, and we will be thorough. The rest of the world will go to bed Friday night and wake up to hundreds of thousands of posters demanding justice on every corner. ♪ I canʼt stop ♪ ♪ I canʼt stop ♪ ♪ I canʼt stop ♪

[Jason Russell] Itʼs always been that the decisions made by the few with the money and the power dictated the priorities of their government and the stories in the media. They determine the lives and the opportunities of their citizens.

But now there is something bigger than that. The people of the world see each other and can protect each other. Itʼs turning the system upside down, and it changes everything. [guy] we are living in a new world, facebook world in which 750 million people share ideas, not thinking in borders. Itʼs a global community bigger than the US. Joseph Kony was committing crimes for twenty years and no one cared. We care.

[Jason Russell] We have reached a crucial time in history where what we do or donʼt do right now will affect every generation to come. Arresting Joseph Kony will prove that the world we live in has new rules, that the technology that has

159 brought our planet together is allowing us to respond to the problems of our friends. We are not just studying human history. We are shaping it. At the end of my life, I want to say that the world weʼve left behind is one that Gavin can be proud of, a place that doesnʼt allow Joseph Konys and child soldiers, a place where children, no matter where they live, have a childhood free from fear.

[Gavin] Iʼm gonna be like you, Dad. [Jason Russell] When you grow up?

[Gavin] Yeah. [Jason Russell] Are you sure?

[Gavin] Iʼm gonna come with you to Africa.

[Jason Russell] Source: LYBIO.net The better world we want is coming. Itʼs just waiting for us to stop at nothing.

Joseph Kony – 2012 – Raise Support For His Arrest. Everything in my heart told me to do something and so I made him a promise.

Instructions on-screen for action

160