2.4 Evaluating ethos

The Appeal to Ethos

Literally translated, ethos means “character.”  In this case, it refers to the character of a writer or speaker, or more specifically, their credibility.  The writer needs to establish credibility so that the audience will trust them and, thus, be more willing to engage with the argument.  If a writer fails to establish a sufficient ethical appeal, then the audience will not take the writer’s argument seriously.

For example, if someone writes an article that is published in an academic journal, in a reputable newspaper or magazine, or on a credible website, those places of publication already imply a certain level of credibility.  If the article is about a scientific issue and the writer is a scientist or has certain academic or professional credentials that relate to the article’s subject, that also will lend credibility to the writer. Finally, if that writer shows that he is knowledgeable about the subject by providing clear explanations of points and by presenting information in an honest and straightforward way that also helps to establish a writer’s credibility.

When evaluating a writer’s ethical appeal, ask the following questions:

Does the writer come across as reliable?

• Viewpoint is logically consistent throughout the text
• Does not use hyperbolic (exaggerated) language
• Has an even, objective tone (not malicious but also not sycophantic)
• Does not come across as subversive or manipulative

Does the writer come across as authoritative and knowledgeable?

• Explains concepts and ideas thoroughly
• Addresses any counter-arguments and successfully rebuts them
• Uses a sufficient number of relevant sources
• Shows an understanding of sources used

What kind of credentials or experience does the writer have?

• Look at byline or search for credible biographical info
• Identify any personal or professional experience mentioned in the text
• Where has this writer’s text been published?

Recognizing a Manipulative Appeal to Ethos

In a perfect world, everyone would tell the truth, and we could depend upon the credibility of speakers and authors. Unfortunately, that is not always the case. You would expect that news reporters would be objective and tell news stories based upon the facts; however, Janet Cooke, Stephen Glass, Jayson Blair, and Brian Williams all lost their jobs for plagiarizing or fabricating part of their news stories. Janet Cooke’s Pulitzer Prize was revoked after it was discovered that she made up “Jimmy,” an eight-year old heroin addict (Prince, 2010). Brian Williams was fired as anchor of the NBC Nightly News for exaggerating his role in the Iraq War.

Others have become infamous for claiming academic degrees that they didn’t earn as in the case of Marilee Jones. At the time of discovery, she was Dean of Admissions at Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT). After 28 years of employment, it was determined that she never graduated from college (Lewin, 2007). However, on her website (http://www.marileejones.com/blog/) she is still promoting herself as “a sought after speaker, consultant and author” and “one of the nation’s most experienced College Admissions Deans.”

Beyond lying about or elaborating upon their own credentials, authors may employ a number of tricks or fallacies to lure you to their point of view. When you recognize these fallacies, you should question the credibility of the speaker and the legitimacy of the argument. If you use these when making your own arguments, be aware that they may undermine or even destroy your credibility.