Public speaking refers to the process of speaking to a group of people in a structured way that is deliberated with the intention of creating an influence or entertaining the listeners. In any public speaking, the purpose of the speech ranges from information transformation to people’s action motivation. It is also a way communication influenced by a number of elements. These elements are evident in the Vice Presidential debate.
The following public speaking skills were shown in the debate. Speakers should first try and determine the audience. In debate, Joe Biden is asked a question by the debate host. The question focuses on the terrorism issues that occurred sometime back in the US. To American citizens, terrorism is a highly sensitive area. After the question, he addresses the issue with a lot of caution in order to capture the attention of the group and to ensure that he fully satisfies them. The audiences are of different demographics: they are of different education levels, gender as well as occupation levels. The Vice President is cautious and tries not to make inappropriate assumptions on the issue of terrorism and security matters. The speaker does feel like condensing on this issue. The speakers seem to understand the attitudes and values of the audience. In line with this, the Vice President Joe Biden promises to carry out a deep root investigation in terrorism matters and ensures that those involved are persecuted. Ryan talks of Americans as of the nation not being in a position of apologizing to other countries that seem to be oppressed by them. This creates a sense of confidence among the audience on the government concern when it comes to security matters.
The Vice President uses physical expression such as smiling. This is especially when a key point about which he had talked, concerning security issues, is being opposed. This captures the interest of the audience in that by smiling so, he shows that he agrees or is in line with the discussion. This involves the audience more in the issues’ discussion and helps to convince the audience that everything discussed is being taken care of it.
As the debate continues, the participants seem to understand the audience attitudes and expectations. For example, they talk of ending the Afghanistan war. In the process of making sure that the audience understands on what they are focused most, they ensure that they insist on what is done. They also touch on the progress already accomplished. This helps everyone in the debate room express opinions as well as concerns on the issue of security. The speakers are clarifying much on the key issues and areas.
Another public speaking concept is evident in the interaction between the audience and the speaker. This includes application of eye contacts, although this should be minimized within a multicultural audience. Both speakers keep on looking at the audience; the Vice President smiles to the audience to show that he puts into consideration all that is being discussed. On the other hand, the physical expression of Ryan defines more what he is addressing. He seems to oppose many of the President Obama’s leadership strategies that got outlined by the Vice President. This shows that the two speakers’ main goal is to adhere to the audience needs and concerns.
The debate continues, and there is much of objection between the two speakers. Every speaker tries to attract the interest and concentration of the audience to his ideas and strives to air them in the most appealing way. The Vice President accuses Ryan of lack of knowledge on the issues of security; he uses this as a strategic tactic in trying to persuade and add the confidence of the audience in the President Obama’s government. He talks of reinstating the entity and status of the US; this was to be done so as to place the nation's security matters on the front line. The debate’s focus is mostly on the security issues, particularly what the government has done and what it is going to do; all of which from the Vice President’s side. On the other hand, Ryan brings out the other side of the story, particularly highlighting what has not been done and what issues have been handled ineffectively.