Let's begin with a quick refresher on forms of persuasion.  Our basic understanding of persuasive strategies today was most famously articulated in the 4th century B.C.  by Greek philospher Aristotle in his book, The Art of Rhetoric.  In Aristotle's view, rhetoric (or more simply the art of speaking and writing effectively) was a means of getting people to do something  (ideally what a speaker or writer wanted them to do.)  In order to convince people to act as the author/orator wanted, techniques could be used to strengthen an argument.  There are many techniques which can be used but all (in Aristotle's system) boiled down to three main categories.  Those three categories  are: pathos, ethos and logos.

• Pathos is an author's use of images and ideas which trigger emotion in a reader or listener.  Someone who uses pathos well can make her audience angry when she wants as well as make her audience sad or happy on command. 
• Ethos is an author's ability to convince his audience that he is telling the truth.  Using ethos well is as much about creating an image of yourself as it is about creating a counter image of your advesary in an intellectual argument. 
• Logos is the author's manipulation of facts and data.  Effective logos emerges from an argument organized in a natural appearance.  When facts and data appear to work well placed in a particular order, logos has been exercised effectively.

Pathos does not have a direct translation into the English language and it is a much bigger concept than it may appear at first.  To begin grasping pathos, look to words such as apathy, sympathy, empathy and pathetic.  Ethos, much like pathos, is a vast idea with no direct translation into the English language.  Words to wrestle with to gain a greater understanding of ethos include: ethics, ethical, habit or custom.  Logos, on the other hand, seems to translate best into English with the word logic.  It is by no means a direct translation but it is closer than the other two Greek terms .  Logos infiltrates the English language with words such as technology, logical, illogical and all of the words ending in -ology (i.e. psychology, biology, geology, etc...)

With that bit of background nominally covered, on to Mr. Beck and his argument: Joseph McCarthy has been misrepresented by history.

June 24th 2010 Glenn Beck Show "How Did Communism Become Cool?"

The times marked on comments below can be found at the following hyperlink .  This link allows you to open, in a separate window, the 16 minutes of Glenn Beck video I viewed.  If you'd prefer to watch 20-ish minutes of his 6/24/2010 show the first two parts are embedded below; however, the times listed will not sync properly.

Glenn Beck is an emotive kind of guy.  He establishes his credibility (his ethos, or rather why you should believe him) from the beginning by saying he knows how you feel.  He almost apologizes in fact for bothering you with what he's getting ready to say.  As a persuasive tactic, he's telling you something for your own good even though he really doesn't want to bother you. 

You better listen!

(0:03) "Hello America.  I want to talk to you tonight about communism and I have to tell you.  I know how you...I know how many people in America feel when somebody gets on the T.V. and says I've got to talk to you about the communists.  3 years ago I mean I would've made fun of people like me.  I would've mocked me.  I would've.  Don't fall into that trap.  Please tonight, open your mind.  Open your ears.  The country is in trouble.  I don't want to believe many of the things that I believe.  I think you're the same."

Glenn Beck laces deadly words into his speech to make you feel bad.  Don't fall into that trap!  It's dangerous to feel that the country is not in trouble.  He's tactfully asking you not to want to believe what you believe.  In other words, he's preparing his viewers because he's going to tell them something so unbelievable they have to believe it.  There is no logic. 

Glenn Beck is appealing for you to just feel what he's saying.

(0:35) "The best thing that ever happened to communists was the Red Scare and Joseph McCarthy."

This is really an astounding statement.  As an argument, such a statement relies on an audience member lacking knowledge in 1950's U.S. history.  A quick Joseph McCarthy search  on the web reveals an unfavorable portrait of a man.  Plan and simple: Joesph McCarthy errantly wielded his power in the U.S. Senate intruding on the privacy of U.S. citizens and wasting taxpayer money combating conspiracy theories.  For Glenn Beck to select a figure like Joseph McCarthy hurts Beck's logos, but alas Glenn Beck is not concerned with logic.

(2:20) "How else can you explain everything that's going on today with little or no outrage?"

Glenn Beck thinks you should be outraged and in order to be outraged you have to feel outrage.  What does outrage feel like?  Glenn Beck will only reveal what a "little bit of an outrage" looks like.  He leaves his viewers to imagine what full blown outrage is and this is a strong persuasive tactic on Beck's part.  If the audience is in an agitated state from any other aspect of life, then it's easier for them to create outrage for themselves.

(2:50) "No one knows anymore or cares about communists.  People who do know about communists are cool. Cameron Diaz illustrated this mindset when she visited Peru...While touring the country she carried a purse emblazoned with a red star and the words right here in Chinese 'serve the people.'  It kind of caused a little bit of an outrage because it was Mao's slogan."

No one knows and that's why Glenn Beck is telling his audience, because Glenn Beck cares and this is important to understand.  The viewer should feel grateful to Glenn Beck for what he's doing.  This is all pathetic emotion being used by Glenn Beck to establish his own ethical credibility.  Glenn Beck seeks emotion from his audience.  He's asking his audience, nearly begging at times, for them to care.  He wants them to feel something about what he's saying.

(5:00) "It's obvious we aren't paying attention to history anymore because the Communist Party had their annual convention broadcast on CSPAN.  Think about that.  Half a century ago we were rooting out communists as traitors to our constitution and our country.  Now we're putting them on CSPAN and nobody says a word.  How did we get here?  How do we get out?"

What Glenn Beck lacks in his persuasive tool box is logos.  In order for statements like the one above to work the audience must either be ignorant of the 1st Amendment or just not care.  No logic resides in not allowing someone to speak in a country with free speech as a founding principle.  Having abandoned logos, Glenn plays the following excerpt from a 1966 Ezra Taft Benson speech.

(5:45) Ezra Taft Benson, former Secretary of Agriculture, "As we [former Soviet leader Nikita Krushchev and Benson] talked face to face, he indicated that my grandchildren would live under communism.  After assuring him that I expected to do all in my power to assure that his and all other grandchildren would live under freedom.  He arrogantly declared in substance: "You Americans are so guillible.  No, you won't accept communism outright; but we'll keep feeding you small doses of socialism until you'll finally wake up and find that you already have communism."

This clip suffers from poor execution of ethos.  The character of record is a little weak.  I'm not saying Ezra Taft Benson was a bad guy, because I didn't know him and I've certainly never heard of him until now.  I simply don't recall the Secretary of Ag playing a pivotal role in 1960's U.S./U.S.S.R Cold War politics. 

It's a little pitchy, Dog!

(10:25) Glenn Beck creates a quick, loose link between a picture of a man blacklisted in 1953 with Sean Penn.  He quickly follows with "interesting we'll get back down there in a second."  He never does.  His argument's logic relies on a simple timeline on the wall.  The timeline actually kind of works as a sort of logos, because there is an order to his thoughts at this point.  The timeline looks like a 7th grader made it, but it gives the viewer something to look at and use to make sense of what he's saying because he's going fast now. 

He's done everything he can do at this pont to make you care and persuade you.  He's begged you.  He's pleaded with you.  He's given you the names of people you should care about.  He's given you the names of people you should feel poorly about.  He's asked you to be outraged and if you haven't heard him until now; he's asking you to look at his timeline.

(10:40)  "The question is was Joseph McCarthy right?"

Having begun with this question and now finally returned to it, after ten minutes of chatter, Glenn Beck's audience is prepared to be persuaded.  If they had any beliefs about Joseph McCarthy coming into this performance, those beliefs were probably negative.  Glenn Beck has already asked his audience to not believe what they believe about Joseph McCarthy though.  Glenn Beck has already established his ethical credibility by describing how much he cares.  He now asks his audience to care as much as he cares.  Glenn Beck asks his audience to feel outrage and answer questions.  Glenn Beck has given reasons like Camaron Diaz's purse to feel outraged.  Outrage is not a pleasant feeling though, so a sufferer must eventually feel a release from the outrage.

"Was Joseph McCarthy right?"

It's almost like Glenn Beck is committing emotional abuse during his program.  His form of persuasion is emotionally taxing.

(11:20) "Marxism wasn't cool then [1950's- 1970's].  Marxism isn't like it is now.  If you were a Marxist then you were a Soviet sympathizer.  You were a traitor to our country.  You've got to put that into perspective."

How many people do you know that say Marxism is cool?  For Glenn Beck's purposes, it doesn't matter.  It doesn't matter the same way it doesn't matter what the difference is between a Marxist and a Soviet sympathizer.  It doesn't matter because he's rapid fire.  He's not really giving his audience a lot of time to stop and think about what he's saying. 

He's asking his audience to not think; just feel! 

(11:45) Venona Papers released in 1995 are Glenn Beck's proof Joseph McCarthy was right.  I had never heard of these Venona Papers either.  This is two times in 16 minutes I'm learning something new.  Suddenly I feel a little stupid, but I don't come away from Glenn Beck's program understanding any better why the Venona Papers are significant.  With a quick trip to wikipedia, I learn the Venona Papers are indeed interesting but apparently not settled.  Glenn Beck again asks his audience to feel a certain way about something they don't understand.

Feel stupid then feel outrage.  The signs have apparently been in your face this whole time and you've done nothing.  You should feel ashamed of yourself a little bit.  Now feel outrage because Glenn Beck breaks out the chalkboard for more logos.  At the top in big pink letters "Communist Goals of 1963."  As far as I know, the word "communist" doesn't poll well in Fox News's demographic.  Glenn Beck is now fully into teacher mode and it's clear Glenn Beck has something poignant to teach his audience.

(14:27) Communist Goals of 1963: "#27 Infiltrate the churches and replace revealed religion with social religion."

The Communists want to take away your God and by the end of Glenn Beck's furious work on the chalkboard his logic has seemed to coallesce into some sort of sense.  It's probably because he has things numbered (although not 1, 2, 3...) on the chalkboard and he generally follows sequential order.  Glenn Beck has in fact, I think, scored a point in the logos portion of his persuasive appeal for the viewer to feel outrage.

(15:25) Glenn Beck's last point on the chalkboard labeled "Communist Goals of 1963" is "Encourage promiscuity and easy divorce."  Again God is being attacked through the sanctity of marriage.  Marriage's definition comes from feelings not logic and at this point I am an emotional wreck.  Glenn Beck finishes his performance leaving his audience like a wet noodle.  He reaches his crescendo standing before the viewer like Moses holding the Declaration of Independence in one hand and the "Communist Goals of 1963" in his other hand.  He demands that you, the viewer, choose between the two.

You must choose! 

And for his all bravado and eloquence, Glenn Beck certainly does well when he persuades his audience to trust him.  The audience trusts Glenn Beck because he appears to, and says that, he cares so deeply.  Glenn Beck's caring and feelings carry his argument.  Glenn Beck offers little logic or factual evidence to persuade an audience Joseph McCarthy was right.  In fact, by the end of his show, Glenn Beck has helped his audience forget the question he started with in order to offer them the choice to be on his side. 

His side is the American side because he has told his audience many times how much he cares about America and he demands from his viewer a choice which only exists on his show.

Part 1 (10:34)