Essay on hussain's speech

Good communication comes in many forms and styles. A good speech is meant to communicate and deliver ideas to the audience; however, there are instances where this goal is not fully achieved. This paper seeks to analyze the quality difference between the first speech and the fourth speech.
The first speech doesn’t have an effective introduction in that it doesn’t capture the audience attention. The speech starts with an apology of a long and slow developing statement. This dissuades and deviate the audiences from listening to the entire speech. Use of an apology signifies failure and lack of efficiency in the organizing the message to be delivered. The other part that proves to be ineffective in the first speech is the conclusion of the speech. The closing part doesn’t signify that the speech is coming to a halt. However, in the fourth speech, significant improvement is clearly evident in opening and closing of the speech. The fourth speech begins by a startling fact of the Pakistan community followed by a question to the audience. This serves to actively engage the audience in the development of the speech by creating a mystery that they are waiting to be revealed. Likewise, the closing part ends with a summary of all the ethnic, social, cultural, and political stands discussed in speech, and appeals the citizen for actions to counter the negative aspects brought out in the speech.
The first speech is not well researched on as evident in the organization of ideas. The points to be discussed are not well stated to pave the way for developing them in a detailed discussion. The speech takes an informative form which requires, but not limited to, 3 to 4 points with an introduction, development, and restatement of the main points. The flow of ideas is also inherent in developing the main points of the speech. In the fourth speech, it is well improved stating the main points of discussion being social, cultural, political and economic stand in the country. Then the point are clearly developed referring to the time Pakistan gained her independence, the formation of MQM party by Hussain to protect these issues, and lastly the speech gives the present stand in the country regarding the main points.
Lack of evidence in the first speech is clearly eminent. The speech lacks support of statistical data and analysis, quotes, displays, or even the measure of authority. Skipping this moral details define the ineffectiveness of the speech. The citizens need to listen to facts not long unsupported story. This issue has been clearly dealt with in the fourth speech. The speech has included statistic showing the financial position of various countries in comparison with Pakistan. Then the speech has quote’s on various government publications showing the actions that led to the poor economic status in the country. Therefore, the fourth speech is more believable than the first speech. Audiences require detailed evidence to understand the relationship between political responsibility and economic development. Therefore, including statistical details in the fourth speech enhance its effectiveness.
Use of language is another aspect that has greatly contributed to failure of my first speech. A fluent discourse is smooth or delightfully elegant speech that drift with ease and freedom. Inadequate preparation and weak vocabularies use is clearly eminent in the first speech. The art of speaking is very poor since there are several uses of word whiskers such as “ and-uh”, “ ohm” and “ uh” make the speech loose fluency. The first speech is also too preachy and formal. This has been amended in the fourth speech since there are no whisker words used, and the speech maintain balanced conversational quality in that it is moderate, not too casual all to preachy, it maintains a professional conversation with the audience.
Incorrect pronunciation significantly detracts the authority of the first speech presentation. However, research been conducted on the appropriate language and pronunciation as seen in the fourth speech. This has contributed to the well supported opinions and arrangement of these opinions so that the audience can follow the reasoning and agree with the conclusion.
The first speech doesn’t follow any known model in presentation of speech contrary to the fourth speech which uses the Greek and Roman oratory. This is model assist in the organization of ideas to meet the specific needs of the audience. The model also outlines the roles of the speaker and the listener including the ethical conduct of both parties. This model allows for positive feedback and responses which is rather an effective way to present a speech.
Conclusively, it would be appropriate to say that the fourth speech is more effective than the first speech. The key elements that contribute to the failure of the first speech are lack of a neither concise introduction nor conclusion which serves as the main way to grab the attention of the audience, the speech lack to follow systematic organization of ideas due to inadequate research, and lack of a model of presentation. These aspects have been well amended in the fourth speech. There is a good introduction and a great conclusion in the fourth speech. The fourth speech also systematically organizes ideas ensuring that the audience follows the reasoning and agree with the conclusion.

Reference

Young, Sally. Government Communication in Australia. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2007.
Lehrman, Robert. The Political Speechwriters Companion. New York: CQ Press, 2009.