In early March 2020, a new reality set in –– masking, social distancing, and isolation took hold of the United States population.  An almost dystopian lifestyle emerged, forcing people to stay at home and adapt.  As the year went on, people began to slowly emerge from their homes, resisting the vice-like grip of Covid 19 to grasp onto any aspect of pre-pandemic life.  After the cancellation of schools in early 2020, plans for in person classes began to emerge.  Colleges soon announced plans to reopen, plans that included precautionary measures such as masking and social distancing.  Educators and health officials were soon met with a predicament: how to convince the socially-starved students to follow regulations in order to prevent a mass outbreak?  Universities began to come out with various slogans and campaigns in order to control students.  Lives are on the line, so any campaign must be rhetorically effective.  Many campuses stepped up to the plate, but not all campaigns are equal.  With knowledge of the vast rhetorical situation and its target audience, Penn State’s “Mask Up or Pack Up” campaign successfully manipulates rhetorical appeals, while using pathos stronger than alternative artifacts.   

(Add Intro into paragraph) Strong knowledge of the audience allows the “Mask Up or Pack Up” campaign to use commonplaces to its advantage.  The targeted audience of the slogan is not only the Penn State community as a whole, but especially the students.  This year, in-person classes were optional, meaning that all students residing at Penn State chose to live on-campus and risk the virus, rather than stay at home with exclusively online class options.  All on-campus-students share one commonplace: the value of in-person education.  Knowledge of this collective student commonplace enables the “Mask Up or Pack Up” campaign to tactfully implore further appeals to persuade the audience of its message.  The commonplace of in-person education and choice to live on-campus displays a distinct desire for the social aspects of the higher-education experience.  Knowledge of this desire allows Penn State to identify where students will frequent in order to socialize and what emotional appeals would be effective in coaxing students to wear masks.   

In order to convince students to follow Covid protocols, the “Mask Up or Pack Up” campaign masterfully adapts kairos to deliver its message.  Before being emersed on campus, students were already exposed to the masking policy through use of the “Mask Up or Pack Up” slogan.  The simplistic, blue banners were posted everywhere students might digitally find themselves in the Penn State online community: any Penn State website proudly displayed the message, and it was heavily emphasized during required online orientation programs.  Due to the blatant representation of the slogan, this Penn State policy was made clear to students before even stepping foot on campus.  The “Mask Up or Pack Up” slogan furthered its kairotic display when students finally arrived.  Blue posters can be seen on every corner of campus: however, it is heavily presented in areas where students will choose to socialize.  Outdoor recreation areas, throughout the commons, and in dorm halls by doors and on each floor have an almost aggressive presence of the slogan.  Anywhere students may choose to congregate; the message is placed at the forefront of attention.  By choosing a vast, yet targeted, placement of the message, Penn State ensures that students view the slogan.  (add conclusion/transitional statement)  

 Similarly to Penn State, Notre Dame created a campaign known as the “Here” Initiative.  The “Here” campaign implores the same common place as Penn State (the value of in-person education) by emphasizing that masking is the only thing enabling students to reside and learn “Here” on campus.  The messages are also kairotically similar: the Here campaign is displayed heavily on Notre Dame’s online community and posters can be found placed similarly around campus.  Pathetically, however, the campaigns diverge.  The “Here” initiative merely capitalizes on the targeted audience through the commonplace, but it does not expand on it.  It plays on the desire to remain on campus, to stay “Here” and learn amongst peers rather than in isolation at home.  The “Mask Up or Pack Up” campaign presents the same ideal, but also plays on students’ fear of being sent home.  “Or Pack Up” indicates that breaking of this rule will result in a possible loss of housing.  This not only asserts the commonplace desire for in-person education, but further persuades students to mask by threatening the attainment of said commonplace.  Penn State’s campaign clearly capitalizes on the commonplace and lays out the consequences for disobedience, which is much more pathetically persuasive than playing on desire to stay on-campus alone.  While the “Here” initiative has similar penalties, they are not directly placed out in front of students through the slogan, which enables students to more easily disregard the masking request.  By using the commonplace and furthering pathetic appeals through fear, Penn State’s “Mask Up or Pack Up” campaign manipulates pathos more effectively.   

(conclusion)