When Obama is at his best (such as the Grant Park ‘Yes, We Can speech), the President has a direct and emotional connection with the American people. This speech, simply, did not live up to that high standard — and the numbers reflect it.
Comparisons with previous addresses and those of other presidents
Passive Voice highest for any major presidential address this century
Surprisingly high tenth-grade reading (and hearing) level
Austin, TX, June 17, 2010 – According to an exclusive analysis by The Global Language Monitor, President Obama’s Oil Spill speech echoed his elite ethos, with a broad plan for an alternative-energy future and few specifics. The only specifics of the address were the continuation of the off-shore drilling ban, effectively putting tens of thousands of Gulf Coast jobs in jeopardy. The President’s first Oval Office address came in at a surprising high tenth-grade reading level, with some 13% passive constructions, the highest level measured in any major presidential address in this century. In political speaking, the passive voice is generally used to either deflect responsibility, or to have no particular ‘doer’ of an action
GLM on Obama’s ‘Yes, We Can!’ victory speech: Ranked Among the Greatest
See “The Colbert Report’s” Send-up of GLM’s Oval Office Analysis
A previous analysis using GLM’s NarrativeTracker™, found the president’s primary narrative arc to be that of ‘Obama as an Oil Spill Enabler’. Nothing in the address would appear to change that narrative, though formal analysis will be forthcoming in the next week.
Kathleen Parker’s ‘Empiracally Vacuous Meme-replication’
Alternet’s Dumbing Down of Obama’s speech to the seventh-grade level.
The Readability Analysis of the Oval Office address appears below:
- Passive Voice — With some 13% passive constructions, the highest level measured in any major presidential address this century. In political speaking, the passive voice is generally used to either deflect responsibility, or to have no particular ‘doer’ of an action, at least when speaking about himself or his Administration. Otherwise, BP was the clear ‘doer’.
- Sentence Length — Obama’s spoke in long, though well-crafted, sentences about 20 words in length.
- Sentences per Paragraphs – Just below four sentences per paragraph. Usually four sentences in a paragraph would be quite easy to understand, but the 19.8 words per sentence, added some difficulty for his target audience.
- Characters per words – Obama’s words had an average of 4.5 letters in them, a bit longer than typical for him.
- Flesch Reading Ease – Reading Ease came in at 59.1. The Closer to 100, the easier to read. This is well within the normal range for Oval Office Addresses.
- Flesch-Kincaid Grade-Level – 9.8 Grade Level. This is the highest of any major Obama speech. Obama’s closest match among recent presidents is Ronald Reagan, whose speeches generally ranged from the 9th to 10th grade levels. (President George W. Bush usually spoke at a seventh grade level.)
Grade-Level comparisons with other speeches of note include:
Kennedy Inaugural Address 10.8
Reagan ‘Tear Down This Wall” 9.8
Lincoln “Gettysburg Address” 9.1
Martin Luther King: ”I have a dream” 8.8
Obama 2004 Democrat Convention 8.3
Obama Victory Speech “Yes, we can” 7.4
“The scores indicate that this was not Obama at his best, especially when attempting make an emotional connection to the American people,” said Paul JJ Payack, president of GLM. “For example, the numbers are significantly different than the ‘Yes, I can” speech, which many consider his best effort.”
How Obama lost control of the oil-spill narrative (Colleen Ross, CBC)
Keep Presidential Speeches Smart (Trevor Butterworth, Forbes)
Textbook Obama (New York Magazine by Chris Bonanos)
The President, the Spill and the Narrative that got away (Simon Mann, The Age)
23 Replies to “Obama Oil Spill Speech Echoes Elite, Aloof Ethos”
If his speech was difficult to comprehend, Mr. Payack, go back to school and become a teacher and resolve the problem.
Maybe you or the President should find a way to provide the listeners who are having trouble with Dr. Seuss translation manuals.
Does everything revolve around sound bites, and “Tweets”? PLEASE! I found the speech to be clear, concise and on target.
Now, for those that are saying that he did not clearly define the “plan” to resolve this issue, let’s be clear… he did not do this, BP did. The oil companies did not step up and address this issue, in fact, they photocopied each other’s game plan and were taken to the woodshed for it.
My son is in 2nd grade and he understood the speech. Maybe we can start learning again instead of picking on a President who can at least say NUCLEAR!!!!