OnSpeechwriting

Sorenson Awards: Recognizing Excellence in Speechwriting

I mentioned earlier that you need to enter the Cicero Awards - and you do - but you also need to enter The Annual Theodore C. Sorenson Speechwriting Award sponsored by Ragan Communications.

The award honors legendary speechwriter Ted Sorenson and recognizes "outstanding achievement in professional speechwriting for an organization."

Here are the details.

The award will be given out at the Ragan Speechwriters' Conference in February - where yours truly will also be presenting (more on that later).

Most important of all - the deadline is Dec. 14. So get your entries in quickly. Luckily, it's easy to enter. So, what's keeping you. Do it now!

A Man of Good Words: Remembering Charles Francis

I was going to write this weekend about a truly awful speech opening I saw recently and then segue that into what makes a really good opening. But this afternoon while perusing the New York Times, I ran across a familiar face looking back at me ... from the obits section no less.

Charles "Chuck" Francis died Wednesday. You may not know the name but there are plenty of speechwriters who do and who still appreciate this man of good words. You can see his official obituary here.

I first met Chuck many years ago at a Ragan Speechwriting Conference as he was trying to drum up business for a new internet venture he had begun: The Idea-Bank. Never heard of it. At least not then. But thanks to Chuck, I became a believer and a long-time subscriber. It was his collection of anecdotes and quotes and historical references put online in a searchable format. Invaluable for people like us.

He would later sell the business to McMurry. Just recently he compiled all of this material into a book: Wisdom Well Said.

It's a fitting title. Years and years ago, when I was preparing a speech I was going to be giving at the Ragan Speechwriters' Conference, I turned to Chuck for help. I had the idea to deliver a speech on "the seven sins of speechwriting." Chuck delivered and I remember his wisdom well said a decade later: "The number one sin of speechwriting is writing a speech the audience won't listen to," he said. "Then repeat that six more times."

Good words, well said. We'll miss you, Chuck.

Enter the Cicero Awards - Impress your Boss

Well, it's that time again. End of the year. Those of you in real companies and organizations are thinking of your performance reviews and wishing you had a taken the time to enter your great material in some awards competitions. After all, we are the silent profession. If not for awards ceremonies, how does anyone really know what we do - or how good we do it? Wouldn't a nice award look awfully good to the boss? 

So what's keeping you from entering the grand-daddy of speechwriting awards competitions: The Cicero Speechwriting Awards sponsored by that most  august of speech publications, Vital Speeches.

As Cicero Awards chairman and known flimflam man David Murray puts it, these awards "recognize the work—the sweat and the blood and the magic—that goes into making the speeches that help leaders achieve prominence in all sectors of business, politics and society."

In addition to a nice certificate, Cicero-winning speeches are included in a broadly publicized book of winners and lauded in a special presentation at the Building and Protecting Reputation 2010 conference in Phoenix in February … a Cicero Speechwriting Award will showcase your work as a superior example of contemporary oratory, and it will recognize you, the writer, as a standout in your field. Again, that according to the prolific blogger and noted motorcycle enthusiast Murray.

So send in any speech - send in every speech - that you’re proud of having written, delivered or both. Here's everything you need:

• Entry Form
• Entry Guidelines
• Categories

So, instead of waiting and wishing, enter now. Get recognized. Put it on your resume. Impress your boss, your mom or your spouse.

 

An Interview with the New Editor of Vital Speeches

Vital Speeches of the Day has a new editor. David Murray, the former editor of Speechwriter's Newsletter and chair of Ragan Communications' annual Speechwriters Conference, has just been handed the reins at the most respected speech journal in the country. He was kind enough to give me an interview about the new position and his goals.

Murray's Background

Murray brings nearly two decades of experience to the position. He's covers speechwriting and executive communications out of Chicago where he lives with his wife and daughter. He also edits the weekly e-newsletter Executive Communication Report and writes and speaks widely on business communication.

If that isn't enough, he also covers politics, society sport and adventure for publications ranging from ESPN the Magazine to the Chicago Tribune and websites ranging from the Huffington Post to Vibe.com. For a look at his personal blog, check out Writing Boots.

As the new editor at Vital Speeches, Murray says in the interview below the personal writing may take a backseat as he gorges on his new job. But he does have time, energy and desire to read your speeches so be sure to send them to him.

The Interview

I realize you just  got the job, but do you see any changes ahead for Vital Speeches of the Day (VSOTD)?

You’re right, I’m just getting settled. I’m afraid to move anything, for fear that one of these great stacks of speeches might fall on me! More important than editorial changes is establishing Vital Speeches online.

I’m pouring all my extra time and energy into our new website, vsotd.com, and into social media surroundings like the herding speechwriters into our new Vital Speeches group on LinkedIn, shoveling historical and contemporary speeches onto our new You Tube channel and—yes—Tweeting.

I want to make Vital Speeches relevant to more than just the Baby-boomer-and-older policy makers, executives, academics and speechwriters who read it now, and the thousands of librarians who subscribe. I want to place Vital Speeches back where it belongs—as something that gets read by everyone who’s interested in what Americans are saying, and how they’re saying it.

As far as my editorial vision, I’m not changing the 75-year-old mission of the publication. I’m just determined to search high and low, as broadmindedly as possible, for powerful oral expressions on every subject, from every point of view imaginable. I want Vital Speeches to be more than the publication of rhetorical record. I want it to be a thrill to read every month.

There’s also now an international version of Vital Speeches. Are you involved in that?

Yep, I edit Vital Speeches International, too. Traditionally, Vital Speeches has focused on American speeches; Vital Speeches International gives us a chance to showcase great talks being given outside the States.

One of the best things about Vital Speeches is that it has always showcased not only important speeches from well-known people (like Presidents and legislators) but also brought readers some fantastic speeches from relative unknowns. Is that still a goal?

Not a goal, Fletch, a mission. Check the October issue—my first—for examples of my willingness to entertain speeches on odd subjects.

What makes a vital speech today and what can speechwriters do to potentially see their work in VSOTD?

As simply as I can put it: A Vital Speech is an authentic attempt by one person to make an audience understand something that’s important to all involved. Whether that’s about healthcare, stained-glass, free trade, dog-fighting or antique Cadillacs—I don’t care. Sincere attempts to communicate ideas to audiences. That’s what I’m after, and that’s what people will subscribe to Vital Speeches to read.  

What’s the biggest no-no for speechwriters hoping to get into VSOTD?

The most tried-and-true test of a speech is: Could any other speaker but mine have given this speech to any other audience but this, at any other time in history? If the answers to most of those criteria are “no,” you’re pretty much a shoe-in. If the answer to two or more is yes, the speech is probably headed for our shitcan. 

I saw something recently I thought I’d never see in VSOTD – slides. Is that recognition that speech giving is changing and technology like PowerPoint is more accepted now?  

Don’t look for many more slides. I do, however, believe our YouTube channel will be an increasingly important part of the Vital Speeches offering. The ability to read a speech—or read along with the delivery—this’ll be instructive to speechwriters, and more interesting for readers. So expect to see some YouTube URLs at the bottom of speeches we have video for.

Is a VSOTD print publication still relevant in an Internet-era and, if so, why?

Take it from the guy who searches the World Wide Web for speeches—there’s still no other central, reliable source of good speeches out there. So as relevant as speeches still are—and I think they’re as relevant as ever—Vital Speeches is still important.   Speeches are long and hard to read online. I don’t see The New Yorker going online-only, and I don’t see Vital Speeches going that way either.   The magazine is also important a big, fat, friendly physical embodiment of a broader community of influential people and the people who help them communicate. That community will probably thrive mostly online, and I hope very much that it grows to the point that we can even have Vital Speeches gatherings someday.  

VSOTD used to be bi-weekly and now it’s a monthly. Is that a reflection of the quality of speeches or simply a reaction to production and printing costs?    

That decision was made before my time, but my understanding is that the move didn’t affect the number of speeches we carry every month—just cut the frequency of publication, which did help with costs. I think it was a good move. One of the reasons I don’t subscribe to The New Yorker is that the darn thing stacks up on me. If you launched that magazine today, you’d never in a million years do it weekly. I think VS is a natural monthly.  

What else are you doing at McMurry to connect with speechwriters and speech givers?

I mentioned Vital Speeches is on Twitter and YouTube and LinkedIn sites. I also blog and podcast at VSOTD.com and we offer news, ideas and opinions on rhetoric there. We want Vital Speeches to be the hub the rhetoric community has never had.

I know you’re passionate about speeches but you also have a personal writing project you’re working on based on your recent motorcycle trip to the Canadian maritime islands. Tell us about that.

Yes, on my personal blog, writingboots.typepad.com I wrote a serial account of that trip, to explain to my five-year-old daughter, when she grows up, why her 40-year-old dad risked his life (and to some extent her childhood) by taking off on a 4,600 mile motorcycle journey. But that seems long ago to me now. I’m up to my ears in speeches, vital and otherwise—and happy to be here.

Clinton: When Seriousness is an Advantage

There’s an old adage about speechwriting that I always fall back on when I’m at a loss about style and tone: Above all else, know thy audience.

Which is why, in any other setting or at any other time, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s speech on Wednesday might have been a bust. But she and her speechwriters do their homework as well as anyone. They understand that speeches on similar subjects can sound different, feel different and produce different results depending on the audience.

Her speech was ostensibly to the Council on Foreign Relations. But the forum before this august group was simply a conduit to a wider audience—the general public—that would never get the entire speech but only excerpts filtered through the media. (Exceptions, of course, to the relatively small numbers of policy wonks, speechwriters like us, and foreign diplomats who actually do mince every word.)

So, why was that audience mindset so important? Because it allowed her to develop a speech that was forthright, pragmatic and built with the purpose of offering up a framework for the Obama Administration’s foreign policy without the burden of having to be entertaining.

Make no mistake: This was not necessarily an entertaining speech. Contrast this speech, for example, to a shorter and lighter speech given to employees of the State Department on roughly the same subject. That one is filled with more humor, is more personable and, perhaps, is even more pleasurable to hear.

This speech is not like that. That is not a criticism. The audiences are different, and they have different needs. Employees may need humor and cajoling. This audience—both the one in the room and the one receiving it via the media—needed easy-to-understand language about what the country’s foreign policy actually is: straightforward language in clear sentences.

Besides, I may be speaking heresy here, but not all speeches have to be entertaining. They have to hold the audience and deliver a message in a way that can be understood. But they don’t necessarily have to be entertaining.

This speech is a great example. It was a serious speech about a serious subject and it was crafted in a classical (and practical) problem-solution structure.

The problem: “…the international agenda today is unforgiving: two wars, conflict in the Middle East, ongoing threats of violent extremism and nuclear proliferation, global recession, climate change, hunger and disease, and a widening gap between the rich and the poor. All of these challenges affect America’s security and prosperity, and they all threaten global stability and progress.”

The solution: A five-step approach to rebuilding the country’s foreign policy that has, at its heart, “…a new era of engagement based on common interests, shared values, and mutual respect. Going forward, capitalizing on America’s unique strengths, we must advance those interests through partnership, and promote universal values through the power of our example and the empowerment of people.”

This is a very workmanlike talk. Short on humor. Heavy on policy. But, like most of her speeches, there was still room for some nice stylistic work that helped the audience—even with the seriousness of topic—pay attention.

A few examples:

•    The problem-solution structure is one easily recognizable by all audiences.
•    The five-step solution allows the audience to follow the progress.
•    Sentence variation—long sentences followed by short, staccato lines—throughout is handled nicely and avoids a sing-songy pattern.
•    She avoids jargon.
•    There are some simple declarative statements that reinforce confidence and control. Drumbeat statements like: “They are wrong” … “Here’s how we’ll do it” … “In today’s world, that’s global malpractice,” and “We cannot go back to Cold War containment or to unilateralism,” are powerful tools for speakers to demonstrate command.

Plus, she delivered it with characteristic strength. Forceful at the right moments. Using her hands—and pointing with her finger—to reinforce important lines helps tremendously.

The overall success of her speech must be gauged over time. But her address is a great example of how to use a broad forum to begin the process of framing the arguments and key messages for your audience.

Here's video from Council on Foreign Relations. Here's audio. 

This article originally appeared at www.Ragan.com