After reading the prompt, I was reminded of one of the worst speeches I have ever heard. This speech takes place at at about thirty eight minutes and fifty seconds into the 2014 meeting Tesla share holders meeting. The speech consists of a man attempting to convince Tesla CEO Elon Musk that he should be brought on as the Vice Chairman of the company or possibly the future CEO. After reviewing the study materials, I believe that the reason this speech was so unpersuasive was because the speaker did not know his audience and because the speech was almost entirely a pathos appeal. First, the speaker essentially interrupted the meeting for self promotion. The meeting was intended for shareholders to discuss the progress of the company they had invested in. It was not meant for the interjection of new ideas by the audience, especially not for self promotion. Secondly, the speech is almost entirely reliant on a pathos appeal. The only argument made that would not be considered a pathos appeal was when the speaker describer himself as a “super genius” and an overlooked “great mind of this generation”. The ethos appeal was entirely made up of opinions and did not provide any credible reason why the speaker is qualified for the positions they are requesting to serve in. Beyond this the speech was entirely a pathos appeal with the speaker becoming emotional and failing to lay out any legitimate credentials or logic reason why they should be the Vice Chairman of the company. This is obviously an extreme example of a speech gone wrong however, I think it highlights what can happen when a speech is horribly constructed. Pathos can be used in many instances where the listeners needs to be prompted to act or made to be sympathetic however this was not the case. If this speech was made at a different time, and relied on great logical arguments about the future of the company and was backed up by proven experience, it may have been more effective.