COP3 - EU REFERENDUM // FEEDBACK

Today I presented my idea to Simon for feedback. Simon's concern with the campaign was the there was no positive representation of the campaign and no incentive for people to want to go out and vote. In essence, the rhetoric was used to bash and insult the politicians and that leads to no positive progress for the "Remain" camp; the rhetoric should be used within Aristotle's thinking and be used to create a positive experience to do something.

So, I agree with Simon but only to a certain extend. The comment about the posters not creating a positive experience or incentive is true. However, this was intentional. The posters are meant to expose the politicians and the "Leave" camp for who they are, liars and deceitful people. This, in essence, is meant to create a strong emotional response. These emotional responses generated from the images were vital in order to persuasive a false narrative of both politicians and the “Leave” campaign in order for the other collateral to be effective. The British public will be vulnerable to the contemporary version of the collateral as they will view it from an already distorted mindset making them more likely to be further disconnected from the “Leave” camp policies and campaign. By applying more rhetorical methods within the other collateral then the guaranteed support for the “Remain” would be secured. The voter will more likely be willing to educate them about fact checking and seek credible information from the website. All these aspects will provide an incentive for the voter to get up, go out and vote for the “Remain” camp.

This is how I see the campaign being represented and portrayed in terms of the rhetorical implementation.