A Taste of the World

Looking back at my TED Talk, the first thing I can say is that my performance is exactly what I was looking for. One of the things I “feared” most about doing this assignment was that it could end up being more of a speech than an actual TED Talk, so I think that I made key decisions throughout the nearly six minutes I talked for in order to make my speech stand out as a TED Talk. The most notable one was to frame the whole issue with the cigarette as a battle/war between two armies: the anti-tobacco movement and the cigarette. I feel this was efficient in both conveying the ideas I wanted, and also captivating the audience in a more casual way, which I feel is what TED Talks are all about. Another thing I feel I did strongly was providing adequate pieces of evidence at the necessary times in order to enrich my argument. Overall, the performance was solid and met my personal expectations. Something to work on for next time would be timing. Knowing which key information to talk about and which less important one to leave out. I felt that perhaps I included a little bit too much information that wasn’t vital to support my arguments.

One of the ideas that initially came to mind when thinking about a public controversy was the bizarre question of what the longest river in the world is. Or, in a similar fashion, what the longest coastline is. Focusing on the former, though, this controversy which obviously lays basis on facts is extremely interesting to explore. How can we say for certain, in mathematical and geographical standards, which is the longest river in the world? The reason why this idea came to my mind too, because, yes, it’s kind of a weird proposal, is because it really surprises me how governments fight each other for the title of having the longest river in the world. There have been many political disputes between Egypt and Brazil, which are the home countries to the Amazon and the Nile rivers, just to see who “possessed” the longest of the two. I feel it would be interesting to investigate the geopolitical advantages having the longest river in the world yields, or simply explore why would countries fight over this factual controversy.

https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1pRA3P42KKr_-AM_U2REGl8CvbV35Hvw0uvVcznGFIRk/edit?usp=sharing

Having completed a good portion of my research for the Unit 2 assignments of the essay and TED talk, I have found three really good sources to help me craft a good essay and speech. All three of the sources have provided me with general information on the decline of cigarette smoking in the United States and the key events that have served as catalysts for this paradigm shift.

The first source I looked at was the Britannica article for the smoking culture in the United States. The article provided insight into how tobacco consumption became popular in America and how it started to cripple in the late 20th century. An important event it mentions is the 1964 Surgeon General’s report on the health hazards of cigarette consumption. This particular report is mentioned in all of the sources I’ve looked at as the event that initiated the paradigm shift.

The second source is on the changing image of public smoking from 1964-2014. This extremely useful chronologically-structured article mentions the key events that have accomplished the reduction in smoking levels over the past 50 years. It mentions Surgeon General’s report as well as the legislation implemented in the United States against tobacco advertisements, the socioeconomic shifts smoking has taken, and finally some of the restrictions that apply to this practice across the whole of the US territory.

On a final note, the third and last source I want to mention talks about the statistical implications of the ending of the tobacco problem. Thanks to this source I have a huge amount of statistics that reflect the effectiveness of all of the policies and reports that have been made or issues over the years.

Favorite TED Talk

http://https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7jx0dTYUO5E

One of, if not my favorite TED talk is the one right above. Mary Roach gave this talk back in 2009 and I recall having watched it for Theory of Knowledge class in my senior year of high school. What I like about this TED talk is the presenter’s ability to talk about a “tabu” topic, or at least a conversation theme many people aren’t 100% comfortable with, with great naturality and spontaneity. The talk is basically an overview of 10 bizarre stories about orgasms, presented in a humoristic and also informative way. The presenter portrays orgasms and masturbation in an extremely original yet informative way. At the end of the day, we’re all different and that’s also reflected in the ways we feel pleasure. One of my favorite examples is one of the woman that reached orgasms while brushing her teeth. Yes, there are people for everything in this world. Roach definitely makes us view that masturbation and orgasms are intimate moments for many different types of personalities.

Unit 2 Idea

The idea I had in mind for the evolving ideas unit is to discuss the evolution of the smoking culture in the United States, where, in my eyes, has been more notable. How have we reached this point where smoking cigarettes is completely stigmatized when it was even considered a luxury back in the day? I intend to analyze this paradigm shift from three different scopes: Medical, economic, and legal implications. All three have certainly contributed to the diminishing smoking culture in the United States. I also feel like it will be interesting to address how smoking has also shifted social classes if it has. My intuition is that smoking cigarettes was much more popular among higher-status men and women than it is know. Currently, we associate cigarette consumption more with working-class men and women, obviously leaving aside the older generations that developed the addiction during the effervescence of the smoking culture, than with more educated and “noble” people.

Upon the conclusion of the rhetorical analysis speech, I wanted to reflect on my overall performance in the assignment. First of all, I would like to reflect on my working ethic and capacity during this project. It was the first time I had to prepare an analytical speech, thereby the hours of practice I had to put into the assignment were part of a really important learning process for me. Personally, I felt like practicing was not just about memorizing the speech, but rather being more and more self-convinced of what I was saying after every practice.

As it pertains to the speech itself, I believe my performance was solid and a good reflection of the analysis of the civic artifact I had. Something I feel I did really well on was presenting a solid thesis statement and topic sentences that “framed” the speech for the audience and made the analysis easier to follow. Something I believe I have to work on for next time is the conclusion. After reading the comments from my peers and listening to my speech a couple of times after publishing it, I feel like I could’ve done a better job of wrapping the analysis and the strong points made. Part of the reason why this part wasn’t as good was the fact I was running out of time, hence this is another area of improvement for next time.

Rolex, Roger Federer, and the Definition of Greatness

Debating who the greatest player of all time is has always been a classic among many sports fans. Tennis has not escaped the grueling conversation, especially since the moment the sport was submerged into its golden era at the hands of the three most successful men to ever hold a racket: Roger Federer, Rafael Nadal, and Novak Djokovic. Of these three, Roger Federer, fancily known as the Swiss Maestro given the patent grace of his movement and skills on the court, was the first one to “hatch” as a world-number-one-level player on the international tennis panorama. His unprecedented success in the early 2000s accompanied by the trademark elegance with which he played, earned him the admiration of the vast majority of tennis fans, who viewed him as the sport’s hero for revolutionalizing and popularizing a game that was reaching a stalemate scenario in terms of entertainment. This catapulted the Swiss to become Rolex’s most valuable asset and global ambassador as he epitomized the elegance and the success that served as the motto of the prestigious firm. Rolex fed off of the rhetorical situation of tennis’ impending doom, to give rise to the commonplace of greatness lying on the numbers. In their “Wimbledon 2010” advert, the firm explored this idea to dovetail the successful figure of Federer with their watches, by capitalizing on a kairotic moment, employing visual rhetoric elements such as perspective to build persuasion and pathetic appeal, and challenging well-established commonplaces as a common thread in the commercial. Similar rhetorical techniques were used in the firm’s most recent advert “Numbers Don’t Matter,” in which they surprisingly refute the commonplace they themselves established in the 2010 commercial, responding to a completely inverted rhetorical situation where Federer’s greatest rivals Nadal and Djokovic have matched the Swiss’ Grand Slam records and eclipsed many of his most valuable records. Employing similar rhetorical strategies Rolex adapts to divergent contexts in order to preserve its status as the “greatest of all time.”

In both the “Wimbledon 2010” and “Numbers Don’t Matter” adverts, Rolex seizes a kairotic moment to urge people not to forget the historic achievements behind Federer’s and their watches’ figures. In the ever-changing worlds of sports and fashion, success is ephemeral and tends to fade from the public’s memory as new names emerge. When Rolex launched their Wimbledon-special advert in 2010, a year where Federer’s greatest declared rival Rafael Nadal was having one of the greatest tennis seasons ever, the motivation was to redirect the public’s attention to the man—Federer— that, despite not being world number 1 at the moment, was still in possession of many of the sport’s greatest records and was in contention for yet another. The Swiss Maestro had lifted the Wimbledon trophy—for many the most prestigious of the all tournaments— six times coming into The Championships in 2010 and thus had the opportunity of claiming a record-tying seventh. Responding to this transcendental kairotic moment, Rolex crafted a commercial with great emphasis on Federer’s historic achievements which Rolex believed rememorating them would help them reclaim. The 30-second advert was an overwhelmingly fast-paced video showing alternating images of Rolex watches tick from the first to the sixth hour and all of Federer’s Wimbledon trophy lifts. This forced the public to relive the days when the Swiss Maestro monopolized the sport’s most important trophies and also pushed the spotlight away from Nadal. The condensing of images into such a short period of time along with the “epic” music in the background and the always stressful image of a clock ticking, was how Rolex smartly created the sense of urgency in a public they wanted to remind who “the greatest” still was. They awakened the audience from a kairotic moment they considered extraordinary and a wrong reflection of reality, where Nadal and the watches he wore skyrocketed in popularity. By including the phrase “A crown for every achievement,” at the end, Rolex was also included at the end to convince the audience Rolex, much like Federer, was still at the top in terms of greatness. 

Much like the 2010 advert, the “Numbers Don’t Matter” commercial is constructed to provoke an urgent shift of attention from the public to relive the historic achievements that enlarged Federer’s greatness. This was also accomplished by speeding up the unfolding of events in the video in what evidenced a sense of urgency in the firm’s claims. Images changed extremely rapidly from Federer holding trophies to groundstrokes of extreme beauty. This way, Rolex seized the kairotic moment with Djokovic and Nadal eclipsing Federer while he’s off the court, by reminding how the latter’s game has been unique from the rest. While the 2010 advert fed off of Federer’s unique achievements, “Numbers Don’t Matter” focuses on the uniqueness of his game style to convey the immense history behind his name. With these snapshots of the past, the ad forces the public to not question Federer as “the greatest” regardless of the context. With the advert, people are given the opportunity of witnessing the Swiss’ magic with the racket to make a hypothetical argument against him more hollow and challenging. Ultimately both commercials are constructed to reinforce Federer and Rolex’s fading achievements by seizing a kairotic moment as a means of reshifting the public’s focus.

In order to build persuasion and increase pathetic appeal, Rolex juggles with visual rhetoric elements such as perspective and thematic imagery. The “Wimbledon 2010” commercial was solely dedicated to regaining the attention of a general public that had “discovered” Rafael Nadal and everything he wore, including his trademark Richard Mille watches, as newborn icons. To accomplish this, Rolex designs an advert that focuses on two images only; a ticking watch and Roger Federer lifting Wimbledon trophies. This is done to create a sense of nostalgia in the audience as they relieve one by one of all of Federer’s accomplishments in the sport’s most famous court. Bringing back the heroic Federer in the spot, evidences how Rolex uses an appeal to pathos and nostalgia to not just remind people of the transcendency of Federer’s figure, but also evoke a sense of admiration for him and, ergo, Rolex watches too. In the commercial, the imagery revolves around the themes of success and greatness as pertaining to Roger Federer, due to the fact the watchmaker firm knew that at the moment, the Swiss was irrefutably the most achieved tennis player of all time. This was the only argument everybody knew belonged to Federer in the “greatest of all time conversation,” hence this visual rhetoric element also demonstrates the creator’s exercise of reading the audience. By not focusing on ambiguous or controversial claims, the advert would consequently pathetically appeal to a greater public, something fundamental before the launching of the new Rolex and the start of what could’ve been a historic Wimbledon. 

This same strategy was employed and even elevated in the “Numbers Don’t Matter” commercial. The Geneva-based watchmaker weaved a sequence of images with a clear thematic change as the advert unfolded. Starting focused on success, with images of trophy lifts, it rapidly moves to cover tcof elegance and off-court paramountcy, transitioning to clips of graceful groundstrokes and off-court campaigns. This also responds to the firm’s exercise of reading the audience, as they understood the unity of the public lay in the ideas of elegance and philanthropy rather than statistical achievements. Responding to the rhetorical situation of Federer’s reign collapsing at the hands of Djokovic and Nadal, Rolex intelligently uses the visual rhetoric in the 2021 advert to make arguments that are nearly impossible to rebut. This way, the video forces the audience to unconsciously forget the context that may be wearing down Federer’s figure as a hero and undisputed icon. Another way in which the “Numbers Don’t Matter” advertisement builds persuasion in favor of Federer’s “greatest of all time” claim is by utilizing different perspectives throughout the minute-and-a-half-long spot. In contrast with the “Wimbledon 2010” advert, this new one covered similar images from completely different angles and perspectives to demonstrate Rolex’s willingness for the public to view the GOAT debate from different points of view. Instead of simply showing frontal shots of Federer lifting the trophy, the newer ad covers Federer rallies from above, behind, in front… all perspectives imaginable. From the newly launched 2021 watch, also present in the commercial, we not only see the numbers, rather multiple points of view of the whole design. This emphasis on the “bigger picture” and on different perspectives is how Rolex implicitly encourages the Federer-skeptics to challenge their arguments by exploring different approaches such as on and off-court elegance. After all, well-roundedness and class are what have set Roger Federer and Rolex apart from their rivals.

Both in the “Wimbledon 2010” and “Number Don’t Matter” adverts, the challenging of well-established commonplaces serves as the primary narrative and ultimate goal for Rolex. Prior to the start of Wimbledon in July 2010, history and career accomplishment were not viewed as important as current standing in the world rankings. Tennis was more about the moment than it was about the history. With the launching of the first of the two commercials in question, Rolex challenged this preconceived notion about success and introduced the element of time and historic transcendence into the equation. The ad features images of a victorious Federer in past Wimbledon editions and a watch, specifically its numbers and clock hands. The inclusion of the latter is to put heavy emphasis on time and make the public vision Federer’s accomplishments as not only moments that happen in the present and fade, but also as specific instances in sports history. With the introduction of this nuance to a popular commonplace at the time, Rolex made Federer’s figure elevate over the rest, given the Swiss’ unrivaled past successes. With this commonplace modification, the watchmaker firm hopes the public starts giving greater value to who is more historic, or who has done more up to that point, than to whoever monopolizes the present. Taking time and historic transcendence into account, both Federer and Rolex maximize their opportunities of remaining perpetually great.

The “Numbers Don’t Matter” advert is even more explicit with its challenging of an even more ingrained commonplace in society. With the already mentioned changing imagery in the commercial, Rolex conveys this idea of modernizing the well-established commonplace in sports that greatness solely lied in numbers. Whenever the firm recognized Djokovic and Nadal’s statistical superiority over their brand icon, they rapidly constructed this advert to question the value of numbers in the greatest of all time debate. Their intention is to stigmatize the numbers-based argument as a superficial claim, and, on the other hand, transition to the commonplace of elegance and off-court class as a more accurate measure of greatness. Diverging from the 2010 video, nonetheless, this time Rolex took the risk of being even more explicit on their criticism of such an extended commonplace. This is showcased in the video by the inclusion of phrases like the following: “How exactly do we measure greatness? By the number of titles? By the number of Grand Slams? Maybe. But not only,” or “Roger Federer’s legacy will prove more perpetual than any number.” By verbally expressing their criticism of a vastly accepted commonplace rather than hinting their disagreement with images or perspective shifts, Rolex’s message in the “Numbers Don’t Matter” advert becomes even more resounding than in the “Wimbledon 2010” one. Ultimately, the refinement of the greatness and success commonplace to include elegance and off-court class is the primary strategy employed by Rolex to sustain their firm and their icon’s legacy.

Hook and Context

Greatness. What constitutes being the greatest? Success? Elegance? Transcendence? Rolex’s minute-long “Numbers Don’t Matter” advert explores this question through the figure of Roger Federer, tennis’ undisputed hero and greatest of all time, at least until last year, before his two greatest rivals Rafael Nadal and Novak Djokovic, started eclipsing many of his most famous records. Suddenly, not only has Federer’s tennis reign crippled, but also Rolex’s motto and most valuable asset. 

Thesis

The ad responds to the kairotic moment of Djokovic and Nadal eclipsing many of Federer’s records and presenting a solid candidacy to the “greatest of all time” title. Given the critical situation of Federer starting to lose the statistical battle two the “villains” of the story, Rolex feels the exigence of having to change the measurement of greatness from numbers to elegance to sustain their motto.

First Argument – Kairos and Exigency

The ad responds to the kairotic moment of Djokovic and Nadal eclipsing many of Federer’s records and presenting a solid candidacy to the “greatest of all time” title

→ Rolex feels the exigence of having to change the measurement of greatness to sustain their motto

→ This is done extremely quickly in the ad

→ photos of roger with a title are changed super rapidly to photos of him elegantly hitting balls or fancily dressed up with class off court

→ This is what demonstrates the kairos, the urgency Rolex has in changing the commonplace to prevent their sales slogan from crippling

Second Argument – Visual Rhetoric to Appeal to the Public’s Emotions

Rolex employs visual rhetoric elements such as imagery and perspective to give rise to new perspectives in well-established commonplaces.

→ Rolex is fighting to establish a new perspective to analyze who the greatest of all time is. Every new image of the Rolex watch is shown from a different perspective

→ This symbolizes how if you look at the watch from different perspectives, you end up finding why it’s still the best

→ The same happens with Federer. Some takes show his hand and racket, others his feet, and others the whole court from above. 

→ If you consider all perspectives he should still be considered the best

Third Argument – Challenging of Well-Established Commonplaces

Ultimately, Rolex utilizes the civic artifact with the intention of challenging the commonplace that greatness lies in numbers.

→ The juxtaposition of the commonplaces of elegance and success serve the firm to challenge the existing ideology that greatness lies solely in numbers

→ Initially, a few images of Federer lifting titles are shown, but as aforementioned, the focus rapidly changes to show images of Federer’s elegance

→ Rolex challenges the commonplace that greatness lies in numbers and modifies it to greatness lying in class and elegance

→ “At the end of the day, Rogers legacy will go beyond just numbers”