The World Of Doublespeak By William Lutz

Each “hearer” also interprets what he hears as a beholder.  Consequently, if an English speaker, or writer desires to convey a message, truth, fiction or nonfiction, entertainment, persuasion, evidence of fact, he must use correct language, perhaps colloquialisms, be aware of the listeners, their education, culture, motivation and attention. The written and spoken language can be used to deceive as well as to inform.  Advertisement, celebrities, leading preachers, politicians are used to provide a single perspective, not thorough information leading to a reasoned conclusion.

One illustration of the manipulation of language today is seen in politics. Politicians speak in a certain manner that can affect the thought process of the listener. They carefully word their speech so that it delivers the correct message to the listener’s brain and creates a certain thought pattern that is ideal for the speaker. For instance, if an idea can be spoken two separate ways and have the same basic meaning, the politician will select a way that controls the way people think of your speech overall by using different wording. In 1984, word manipulation similar to this technique is used. The ministry branches, Ministry of Love, Ministry of Peace, Ministry of Plenty and Ministry of Truth, all had opposite meanings. For example, the ministry of Peace was really the Ministry of War and the Ministry of Love was really the Ministry of Law Enforcement and Punishment. This caused people to think that the Ministries were better than they really were and they forgot about the bad things they stood for.

One of the most crucial reasons people in positions of power use doublespeak is to twist the truth or reality of a negative situation to their audience. William J. Kopple, professor and department cochairman of English at Calvin College, is author of the paper “Still Vigilant about Doublespeak?” featured in the Language Arts Journal

Lutz begins the persuasive essay with a sarcastic tone. He distinguishes the use of doublespeak with quotation marks. He starts off each sentence without the use of doublespeak and ends with how doublespeak perceives the situation to be rather than the reality. Lutz states, “The Reagan Administration didn’t propose any new taxes, just “revenue enhancement” through new “user’s fees.” (Lutz line 1-3) He shows how “taxes” was changed to something different in order to mislead the public. William Lutz provided various examples to show that doublespeak can sugarcoat different situations. He then goes on to supply a definition of doublespeak through diction. William Lutz continues to classify doublespeak as a “language” and explains how it is used to mislead others. He states, “Doublespeak is language that avoids or shifts responsibility, language that is at variance with its real or purported meaning.” (Lutz line10-11) This shows that it is at a whole other level that has to be deciphered to be able to understand and also suggests that can be difficult to capture. Lutz also uses repetition to give the definition. He states, “It is the incongruity between the word and referent, between seem and be, between the essential function of language…” (Lutz line 15-16) This emphasizes the length of the effect doublespeak can have. Lutz begins to structure his essay into subsections to further explain doublespeak. The first subsection focuses on “How to Spot Doublespeak.” He

In the essay, “Propaganda: How Not to be Bamboozled,” and “The World of Doublespeak,” both authors discuss and explains the unusual types of propaganda and the misleading nature of doublespeak. First, Donna Woolfolk Cross describes the constructions and the specific methods propaganda presented in our day by day life, and how to avoid being tricked. Also Cross believes that it is important for People in a democratic society to be well informed about propaganda due to how people get manipulated into simply doing something except thinking. Additionally, Cross explains for us as readers the different sorts of propaganda and how we view the topics in a positive way. She highlights in her essay that propaganda is not continually negative; however, it also used in significant ways. Cross presents in her essay that there are thirteen different types of propaganda; such as Card Stacking, Name calling, and

George Orwell’s essay, Politics and the English Language, first published in 1946, talks about some “bad habits”, which have driven the English language in the wrong direction, that is, away from communicating ideas. In his essay he quotes five passages, each from a different author, which embody the faults he is talking about. He lists dying metaphors, operators, pretentious diction, and meaningless words as things to look out for in your own writing and the writing of others (593-595). He talks about political uses of the English language. Our language has become ugly and the ugliness impedes upon communication. Ugly uses of language have been reinforced and passed down in the population “even among people who should and do know

Political press can play such crucial role in the viewpoints of citizens; with an impact like this, it is essential to have explicit information. George Orwell’s 1946 essay “Politics and the English Language” he argues that Politicians have manipulated the English language, thus making their points euphemistic. He explains that these that, “...it is broadly true that political writing is bad writing” and results to a politician being “unconscious of what he is saying” (Orwell). Even though this essay was written in 1946, Orwell’s six basic rules are still broken. For instance, Donald Trump’s immigration speech is prime example of what Orwell would conclude as “nonsense”. The speech breaks the elementary rules by using unfamiliar phrases,

Many of the predictions made by George Orwell in his book 1984 in relation to corruption of language are recognizable in the United States today. Our language is in the process of changing. The introduction of politically correct words and phrases over the past few decades is based on the principles of Orwell's Newspeak. Today, this phenomenon is a tool of liberals used to erase the opinions of the past, and to help propagate new ideas, and is rooted in the same motives as Newspeak. Although Political Correctness may not be all-encompassing as its Orwell's Newspeak, Political Correctness is equally as dangerous and oppressive to free thought. For example, terms such as "Affirmative Action" implies Action which is correct ("Affirmative" means correct, and "Action" is normally good as well) when actually what is meant is the preferential treatment for a particular minority group. The word "Peacekeepers," now refers to a soldier that occupies a foreign nation. During the cold war, when the USSR would do that type of thing,

In Cross’s opinion, she believes people are bamboozled by propaganda because they fail to recognize when they experience it (248). The thirteen propaganda methods Cross describes in this essay include the following: Name-Calling, Glittering Generalities, Plain-Folks Appeal, Arguementum Ad Populum (Stroking),

* Identify the informal fallacies, assumptions, and biases involved in manipulative appeals and abuses of language.

“Doublespeak” can be seen frequently in the world of 1984. The party’s big slogan “WAR IS PEACE. FREEDOM IS SLAVERY. IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH.” (George Orwell, 4) is an good example. The idea of the slogan is to convince the citizens that what they want, is what they already have. Only war can make peace and harmony, so peace is no longer peace, it becomes war; anyone who is slaved and wants freedom, he already has freedom; you can only strengthen yourself by not knowing things and being ignorant. The slogan changes truth and make the citizens believe that anything they want other than what their government wants can only make them unhappy, therefore, no one will consider rebellion because they believe the Party’s way of governing is the best and only way. “BIG BROTHER IS WATCHING YOU” (George Orwell, 3) is

In the essay, “Propaganda: How Not to be Bamboozled,” and “The World of Doublespeak,” both authors discuss and explains the unusual types of propaganda and the misleading nature of doublespeak. First, Donna Woolfolk Cross describes the constructions and the specific methods propaganda presented in our day by day life, and how to avoid being tricked. Also Cross believes that it is important for people in a democratic society to be well informed about propaganda due to how people get manipulated into simply doing something except thinking. Additionally, Cross explains for us as readers the different sorts of propaganda and how we view the topics in a positive way. She highlights in her essay that propaganda is not continually negative; however, it also used in significant ways. Cross presents in her essay that there are thirteen different types of propaganda; such as Card Stacking, Name calling, and Glittering

Rhetoric is a course in which students are taught the values of persuasion. And yet, behind this course is the utmost power to corrupt the world, changing it into a world of our own policies. This power, even though seldom discussed, has lead to many intriguing discoveries. One such discovery is how people are able to shape the world they live in simply by choosing the right words. Therefore those who would want the world to be a better place must protect this power. If in the wrong hands this power could cause serious damage. Several authors have striven to protect rhetoric and its power. Few agree on the matter of defining rhetoric, but they know that they must protect rhetoric from dark souls. A single definition of rhetoric must maintain a simplistic nature while incorporating every aspect of rhetoric. However, I argue that rhetoric is a means of persuading audiences of a situation and a particular reality through language and personal appeal. In order to prove this definition I will discuss how rhetoric creates a situation, the shaping of a different reality, the audience, the use of language, and the personal appeal. Finally, I will demonstrate the absolute need for rhetoric.

Current events create opportunities to analyze rhetorical situations in action and apply the effectiveness of rhetoric’s various definitions in a real-world context. One such recent event that sparked controversy in this year’s presidential election was Hillary Clinton and, her aide, Huma Abedin’s email crisis. The scandal specifically highlighted how these women handled classified information on their personal servers and relayed sensitive emails on private devices (Goldman and Apuzzo P6). Investigators working on the case of Anthony Weiner, Abedin’s estranged husband, confiscated a personal laptop and found nearly 650,000 emails; they loaded these emails into computer software designed to detect classified information (Schmidt, et al. A17).

To some speakers and writers, propaganda is an evil instrument. The negative approaches make a part of the world think that propagandists hoodwink the population, use half-truths, lie, conceal and distort facts. Although there are many pessimistic perspectives, there are others who have a positive view and think especially of techniques, slogans, catchwords and other devices. They prefer effective language, the rhetoric way, to persuade the audience (Pan, 2012).