Rhetoric and Bias

By: Emeley Brain

You may not know it, but you use rhetoric every day when you communicate with others. Rhetoric, in its simplest form, is the use of written, spoken, and visual language to communicate in everyday life (“What is rhetoric?: Rhetoric and writing studies: Arts and letters”). When used correctly, rhetoric is an art form that utilizes effective speaking and writing techniques to influence an audience. There are three categories of rhetorical appeals:

- Logos: using logical arguments, such as factual evidence and common knowledge, to persuade an audience

- Pathos: invoking emotions through emotional stories, word choice, and imagery to persuade an audience

- Ethos: demonstrating trustworthiness, goodwill, and morality to persuade an audience

While rhetoric has gained a rather negative connotation in our modern society, it is not inherently dangerous and is an essential tool to be an effective writer and communicator. Whether one intends to incite significant policy changes through a written document or simply wants to convince the world green Skittles taste the best, rhetoric is required for successfully using language to achieve the desired outcome.

If rhetoric is such an essential tool for effective communication, where does the negative connotation come from? Well, when used in the proper way, rhetoric is a beautiful piece of art, but when used with ill-intent, rhetoric can be a dangerous statement piece. So how can one make sure they are not being influenced by faulty rhetoric? To combat against potentially harmful rhetoric, there are two major considerations to be made: writer/speaker bias and the rhetorical situation (“Rhetoric”).

Bias is a prejudice or inclination for or against an item, person, or group, often in an unfair way (Steinhauser). Everyone has biases. It is an innate attribute of being human. We all have opinions and preferences, thus we all have biases. While biases are often regarded as negative, this is not always the case, and some can even be positive and helpful. Biases become harmful and damaging when we fail to recognize them and allow them to unfairly impact our decisions, actions, and relationships. Bias can influence how information is presented, received, and acted upon. Often times, when bias encounters rhetoric, information becomes distorted, division is amplified, and logical fallacies emerge. As such, it is crucial to consider the authors bias before taking the argument presented by any source at face value. If an author demonstrates an extreme bias towards a certain group, ideology, item, or opinion, it can influence the rhetorical appeal they use and how they do so in manners that may not give the reader the entire story. Biased pieces should not be avoided, but understanding the authors biases can help ensure a more objective reader view of the pieces contents, rather than the subjective view the authors rhetoric aims to promote.

To illustrate how bias in rhetoric can be dangerous, consider the following headlines, both on climate change policies:

New York Post: “Europe is committing economic suicide with climate change cult”

The Guardian: “Scientists slam Trump administration climate report as a ‘farce’ full of misinformation”

Both of these articles discuss climate change policies being implemented, but one of the sources has a bias against the climate change policies discussed and the other has a bias for the climate change policies discussed, which is amplified through the rhetoric used in the headlines alone. The first headline uses pathos to create an upset, maddened emotional response in the audience through the use of words such as “suicide” and “cult” to persuade the audience against the topic at hand. The second headline uses ethos to persuade their audience of their trustworthiness and reliability through the use of the word “scientists” to convince the audience that their opinion on the topic is reliable, trustworthy, and should thus be agreed with. Both of these articles discuss the climate change policies themselves, but they rely on rhetoric through words, phrases, and images to highlight these policies through biased lenses. The information in these articles can still be utilized, but one should acknowledge the biases behind the rhetoric in these articles before developing their own final opinion.

The rhetorical situation is the context behind an article or speech. Similar to bias, the rhetorical situation also heavily affects the rhetorical appeals chosen and how they are implemented. The rhetorical situation can be defined through many factors, such as current events, cultural significance, cultural practices and expectations, the authors purpose, the intended audience, and the writer. Often, authors will tailor their work for an intended audience, and this can result in the use of rhetorical appeal to common aspects of the audience that have no relevance to the argument itself. Additionally, an author often intends to persuade when using rhetoric, and this can result in a biased, one-sided presentation of the argument being made. The author may also adjust the rhetorical appeal they use depending on recent events regarding the contents of their writing and based on how the topic has been received within a culture. Considering the rhetorical situation when analyzing how a source has chosen to utilize rhetoric can protect readers from developing a limited perspective on the topic discussed.

To illustrate how rhetorical situations can negatively influence the use of rhetoric by a source, consider the following headlines regarding Edward Snowden:

National Review: “Snowden is a Traitor and a Fraud, Period”

The Guardian: “Edward Snowden Full Statement: ‘It Was the Right Thing to Do and I Have No Regrets.’”

Both of these sources discuss Edward Snowden, who leaked classified information from NSA files. However, one source uses rhetoric to persuade readers that Snowden’s actions were unjustified, while the other uses rhetoric to persuade readers that Snowden’s actions were justified. Now consider the rhetorical situation. The Guardian was the news outlet that Snowden

leaked the document contents to, while National Review had no association with Snowden. With this in mind, an ulterior motive behind the rhetoric used in the article by The Guardian emerges. Whether or not Snowden’s actions were justified, they were illegal, and the second sources rhetorical situation results in a blindness to this aspect of the story in their writing. By using both sources and considering the rhetorical situation under which these articles were written, one can develop a full perspective on the story of Edward Snowden before determining if his actions were moral or not.

As mentioned, rhetoric is crucial for persuasion, and it is a glorious tool that all writers should keep in their toolbox. However, rhetoric can become a dangerous tool when it is poorly influenced/motivated by author bias and the circumstances under which it is being used. As such, it is essential that one learns to recognize the use of rhetoric, the potential biases motivating the use of rhetoric, and the overall circumstances surrounding the use of rhetoric when conducting research, analyzing a source, or just reading up on current events online to ensure the well-backed formulation of ones own ideologies, beliefs, or opinions.

Works Cited

“Edward Snowden Full Statement: ‘It Was the Right Thing to Do and I Have No Regrets.’” The Guardian, Guardian News and Media, 12 July 2013, www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jul/12/edward-snowden-full-statement-moscow.

Fleitz, Fred. “Snowden Is a Traitor and a Fraud, Period.” National Review, National Review, 19 Sept. 2016, www.nationalreview.com/2016/09/edward-snowden-report-house- intelligence-committee-not-pardon/.

Lomborg, Bjorn. “Europe Is Committing Economic Suicide with Climate Change Cult.” New York Post, New York Post, 17 July 2025, nypost.com/2025/07/17/opinion/europe-is- committing-economic-suicide-with-climate-change-cult/.

“Rhetoric.” The Writing Center, George Mason University, writingcenter.gmu.edu/writing- resources/general-writing-practices/rhetoric. Accessed 31 Aug. 2025.

“Scientists Slam Trump Administration Climate Report as a ‘farce’ Full of Misinformation.” The

Guardian, Guardian News and Media, 1 Aug. 2025, www.theguardian.com/us- news/2025/aug/01/trump-epa-climate-change-report.

Steinhauser, Karen. “Everyone Is a Little Bit Biased.” American Bar Association, American Bar

Association, Apr. 2020, www.americanbar.org/groups/business_law/resources/business-law- today/2020-april/everyone-is-a-little-bit-biased/.

“What Is Rhetoric?: Rhetoric and Writing Studies: Arts and Letters.” SDSU, San Diego State

University, 1 Aug. 2025, rhetoric.sdsu.edu/about/what-is-rhetoric.

Purdue Owl Shortcut