E-Portfolio

My name is William Sefcik and included in this e-Portfolio is a selection of works that I have completed as an undergraduate student at the Pennsylvania State University. I’m currently a History and Political Science double major with a minor concentration of study in Military History. Upon graduating from Penn State, I plan to receive a commission, as a Second Lieutenant, in the United States Army. At Penn State, I’m involved in many organizations, most notably the Pennsylvania State University Army ROTC. As a cadet in the ROTC program, I have participated in many philanthropic opportunities, including THON, Penn State’s Dance Marathon for Pediatric Cancer, and tutoring struggling high school students in Math and Science. 


At Penn State, not only am I receiving a great education, but I’m learning so much about the art of communicating effectively. The works that I have included in this e-Portfolio are selections that I feel truly demonstrate my proficiency with rhetoric and portray a clear understanding of communication. The professors that I’ve had while attending Penn State have inspired me to be an effective communicator. Living in a world that is constantly experiencing change, communication is, by far, one of he most important skills for an aspirant of higher education to master. Lacking proper communication skills is equivalent to not being able to breathe. Communication is purpose and direction to a young leader, such as myself. If I want people to follow me into combat, or into an important business investment, I need to be able to inspire others with my words. I hope that after browsing through the collection of works that are located in the, “Selected Works,” section of this e-Portfolio, that you get the idea that William Sefcik is an extremely respectable communicator. If you have any questions about my works, or would like to get in contact with me, please find my contact information in the, “Contact Will,” section. I appreciate your viewing of my e-Portfolio and I hope you enjoy what you view!

http://williamsefcikportfolio.weebly.com

Switch up on hit comedy will change up the rhetoric of the show

      Next week on the hit TV comedy, The Office, Will Ferrell will begin his role as the replacement of the character Michael Scott, played by Steve Carell. To many people out there who don’t pay attention to the show and it’s developments will just look over this change in the show as nothing, but to the devoted fans of the show this is a major change in direction. Steve Carell has been known for the past couple of years as one of the funniest people on television. His ability to be funny by playing the incompetent boss on The Office gave the show it’s name. Now at this point you might be wondering what this post has to do with rhetoric, so let me explain.

      Will Ferrell is known for his over the top theatrics and ridiculous use of over-exaggeration and nonsensical comedy – not the subtle, more relaxed comedy that Steve Carell uses. The producers of the show are taking a major risk by implementing Ferrell into the plot, because his form of comedy just might not jell with the rest of the actors on the show. I feel that Ferrell will be funny, but will not fit the typical mold that people are use to on the show. It will be interesting to see if Ferrell tries to appeal to different aspects of comedy, in order to reach the taste of the typical viewer who watches the show, which is a very broad demographic. It will also be a challenge for Ferrell to try and fit the mold, while also creating his own character traits, which are specific to each character on the show. Ferrell will have to try and appeal to a more logos base form of comedy, instead of the emotional comedic appeal he is use to. Instead of always screaming like a ten-year-old or falling off of something in an awkward way, Ferrell will have to appeal to the ‘office’ humor that makes the show so popular.

Rhetoric of the Drunken History Youtube Series

Drunken History is a web-based comedy mini series, which features many popular comedians telling stories from America’s history while heavily intoxicated. Other prominent comedians are used as actors who play the parts of the characters from history and go along with the funny dialogue that gets put in their mouths by the drunken narrator. I discovered this series over the summer, when my roommate at the time showed me an episode, which he had been shone in class. My old roommate was not a fan of history in high school, but the whole shenanigans of the premise of the show intrigued him. I thought at the time that this was a very interesting concept, because they are actually bringing a very valid idea to the table. Why not present history to young adults in a way that entertains them? The history lessons follow the general storyline of the actual event, and if the viewers actually learn something from watching the episodes, then why not?

It’s interesting to me that generally, people wouldn’t care about the history of Benjamin Franklin, and I would be surprised if the majority of the American population knew that Benjamin Franklin discovered electricity, but if they saw the Drunken History episode on Benjamin Franklin, they might learn something. Granted, Franklin didn’t hate his son and want him to get struck by lightning, but you have to take the episodes with a grain of salt and understand that the episodes are meant to entertain, not necessarily be completely factual. I would hope that people could watch the episodes and be able to separate fact from fiction, but that is the trouble with the series – being able to judge your audiences’ intelligence. If people watched the series and believed every word, we would be in a lot more trouble than we are now. So what does this series and its popularity say about society as a whole? It seems to me that younger generations are taking more away from Youtube videos than they are school textbooks. If the global community is going to continue to allow these sorts of videos to dictate what younger generations learn from history, it would be in everyone's best interest to take a moment and decide if this is the right decision. Can we afford to let our youth learn about our history through comedic four minute video clips? I would hope there are enough people out that realize the gravity that these videos can have on society as a whole. If you haven’t seen the series, I would suggest checking it out on YouTube, because it really is very entertaining. I've provided a link below, just in case you can't wait to figure out what all the fuss is about.

<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YjZR1Rjj_p0>

Pandora Ads

Every day when I start my homework, the first thing that I do is put on music. There is only so many times you can listen to the same iTunes playlist, so I have to go to a different source for my musical entertainment. My favorite source for music is Pandora, also called the Human Genome Project. Pandora allows the listener to constantly stream music that relates to a particular song, artist, or genre that the listener has selected.

I have been a Pandora user for about four years now. When I first started to use the site, it was like heaven. I could listen to a bunch of music I liked, and discover a lot of music I had never heard of before, but the honeymoon period I had with Pandora ended shortly after I realized the business of Pandora. The site is supported partially due to revenue it collects from the ads that it promotes on its site. A large ad covers much of the main screen and audio ads run on the site about every six songs. Before, you could have Pandora running in the background of your party, and everyone thought you had really good taste in music, but now, the ads are a dead giveaway that you are as boring as the rest of the world who can’t generate a decent playlist of music. The advertisements work in a way that can trick someone who gets lost in the music. One minute you could be listening to Mozart’s Symphony No. 40 and the next minute you hear, “Hey, have you tried this scent of Axe yet?” Other commercials actually use music to trick you into thinking you are listening to a selected piece of music, when suddenly, someone is trying to sell you another useful product or 100 free business cards. The ads in Pandora really take away from the music listening experience, but then again, the creators aren’t really worried about you enjoying the music as much as them making money. 

Rhetorical Billboards

This week, my roommate was stumbling and happened to discover a very funny website which spotlights rhetorical billboards. One of my favorite pictures was of two billboards, which happened to be placed right next to each other on the side of a busy street. The billboard to the left is an advertisement from the car company Audi that reads, “Your Move, BMW.” The billboard to the right is a response from the car company BMW, which reads, “Checkmate.” Both of the car companies are trying to showcase their newest, coolest cars, and the companies are obviously rival luxury car producers. What appears to have happened is that Audi decided to take a shot at BMW with the billboard on the left, and BMW’s response to the advertisement was the billboard to the right, which probably went up quite soon after the Audi ad was put up.  This ad does a few things for me rhetorically, with the placement of the ads, the simple words, and the simple make-up of the ads themselves.

The placement of the ads next to each other is very rhetorically genius idea by BMW. When the Audi ad went up, someone from BMW must have come up with the genius idea of turning Audi’s ad campaign into a positive for BMW. The phrase, “Checkmate,” is simple, but also is the perfect response to Audi’s challenging words. The response, which refers to the game of chess, is a response, which most people would be familiar with, and upon seeing it would get a chuckle out of the witty response of the BMW ad. The appearance of the ads is very rhetorical in themselves, because although there are pictures of each company’s featured cars on the billboards, the billboards draw the viewers’ eyes toward the words with their black backgrounds and white lettering which beg to be read. Aside from being pretty funny, this is a great example of rhetoric at it’s finest.

 Works Cited:

Author Unknown. cSlacker.com. 2011. 17, March 2011.

http://www.cslacker.com/images/file/mediums/billboard_wars.jpg

The Rhetoric of television

The Office is a very unique television shows for many reasons. The show has a way of using rhetoric to portray comedy in a way that television has never seen before. It was one of the first comedies to not include a laugh track in the background of the episodes. This creates a rhetorical effect with the audience, because the audience is forced to really pay attention to the plot of the show in order to get the jokes. It plays on the idea of kairos, or an opportune time, because the audience has to find a time to laugh. There are many times during the show when a simple chuckle will do, but other times bursting out in laughter is perfectly acceptable. The exclusion of a laugh track also makes the audience realize that everyone has a unique sense of humor. Some people will find jokes funny, because it may play on a current event that they are up to date on, while another person might not find the joke funny, because they don’t understand the context of the joke. The Office has been revolutionary in introducing a new form of comedy, which gives the audience to find humor without the guidance of a superficial laugh track.

            The Office also uses the rhetorical element of logos, but in a twisted sort of way. The show plays on an office environment, which normally would not have many abnormalities, but the show turns the environment into a complete circus where any amount of credibility is thrown out the window. The show works so well, because it plays on the lack of logic in the work environment. Some viewers might have a slightly odd boss, like Michael Scott, or work with a socially awkward employee like Dwight. Rhetoric can be found anywhere in entertainment and The Office is another revolutionary asset to the entertainment business displaying rhetoric at its best.  

Rhetorical Language in the Yemen Protests

Today the BBC ran a story on the President of Yemen, Ali Abdullah Saleh, and his recent orders regarding the protests, which have bee happening throughout Yemen. Saleh has ordered his police forces to protect all of the protestors, who have been getting killed recently during the protests. So far, the number of protestors who have been killed is up to 15 individuals.  Saleh was quoted saying, “The government... will continue to protect the rights of its citizens to assemble peacefully and their right to freedom of expression." My question is why would he want to protect the rights of people who are trying to overthrow his government, which he has retained power of since the late 1970’s?

I believe that Saleh is trying to use his language to inspire a new feeling in the protestors. At first, their protests were being met by violence by pro-government protestors and government security forces, but this new turn of events seems to cry a different message. I believe that Saleh is trying to gain back the trust of the people, a people that are plagued by a high unemployment rate and an extremely corrupt government. Saleh’s words seem very calm and considerate towards the people of Yemen, but can he really be sincere? He may be trying to gain the trust of the global community, whom has been watching his country’s government fall apart for the last several weeks. Nine of the members of the high government circle have stepped down since the recent deaths of protestors. Saleh has tried to meet the anti-government protestors’ wishes by vowing to step down from power in 2013, a whole 2 years away, but the people of Yemen don’t think that is soon enough. Saleh is in a very rough spot and is now trying to gain the trust of the people so that his government doesn’t fold around him. In some cases, concession to the crowd might be a good idea, but I believe in this case, Saleh has implemented this technique way too late in the game and has now made himself look weak in front of his people. A good leader uses his language to inspire and promote a sense of confidence in his group, or in this case, country. Saleh, through his language, has not come across as a strong leader, rather one who is indecisive and in a panic mode as the people of Yemen will soon enough reform the government.


The BBC. "Yemen's president orders forces to protect protesters." February 24, 2011. February 24, 2011.

<http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-12564248>