In conclusion, the Regan artifact was initially evaluated with the neo-Aristotelian method focused on the units of analysis ethos and delivery. A deeper investigated was conducted using the situational method outlined by Bitzer, along with generic criticism supported with secondary sources by Hart and Gustainis. In this tragedy address there was the exigence, the Challenger exploding, the audience, the American people, and the constraints of only the audience being able to respond emotionally by possibly having hope in the NASA Space Program again. Tragedy address’ and crisis rhetoric that were present in the Regan artifact were also in the other speeches analyzed - Hurricane Katrina and the Pearl Harbor attacks. In all three speeches, the President(s) were addressing the nation over a shared tragedy, calming crisis emotions, and restoring hope to broken country. All three situational and all three falling into the same gerne of tragedy address. As evident in theses speeches and in other crisis rhetoric, the speaker must stay ahead of the blame and often, has to divert the nation from the truth.

A fine example of Regan implementing the methods of situational rhetoric. He is listing other similar situations of tragedy in the face of exploration that required certain rhetoric for progress, exigence, audience, and constraint.

The situation creates the rhetoric, rhetoric is a kind of force and it's supposed to change what people think. The speech is the rhetor's interpretation of reality, communicated to an audience, and that’s how knowledge, or in the case of my artifacts, hope, is created. The audience(s) were able to respond to the situation emotionally due to the rhetors forward-thinking and tone.

Another piece of evidence that displayed that Regan’s ethos was a successful means of persuasion in rebuilding faith and restoring trust in the NASA Space program was when Regan stated, “I’ve always had great faith in and respect for our space program”. The implication here was that if Regan, a man of solid ethos, still respects and trusts in the program, then so should the rest of the nation. His charismatic character encouraged Americans to follow his leadership, take his words of mourning to heart, and have faith in the NASA Space Program again. Regan was putting his credibility on the line when he said that he had great faith in the program because there have been disasters before (his reference to the explosion on the ground), and that there would possibly be more disasters in the future. Regan was bracing the public and they should trust him because he was a good man who believed in paying the price for freedom, “that’s the way freedom is, and we wouldn’t change it for a minute.” Good men and women fight for freedom. Good men and woman die for freedom. And let it be known, good men and women will continue to fight for freedom in the face of tragedy. For America to continue to enjoy the free world and trust in the leader of the free world, the nation needed to trust the NASA Space Program again.

J. Justin Gustainis, author from the article, “The Generic Criticism of Social Movement Rhetoric” from the journal, Rhetoric Society Quarterly (1982), says “genres have been defined by similarities in audience, by similarities in modes of thinking, by similarities in situations,” (252). When comparing the similar generic methods of the Regan address, Pearl Harbor, and the Bush speech, we can see that the audiences were in similar emotional crisis with the similar situation of national disaster. With situational criticism and this genre of speech, tragedy address, the problem first arises and then the rhetoric to soothe and give hope to the audience.

In this sentence, Regan uses his ethos and delivery found in the neo-Aristotelian method to encourage Americans to move forward, have faith, and trust the NASA Space Program again.

http://proxy.wexler.hunter.cuny.edu/login?url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/3885165

I believe that the rhetor, President Regan, had a fitting response to the situation addressed within this artifact. The situation at hand was a part of exploring and discovery, as in, this type of tragedy can happen when you explore the unknown. One situation, the desire for space exploration, creates a tragedy situation because of human error and pressure. The audience is limited in their actions because it’s the majority of the American population that witnessed the explosion and is in emotional crisis due to this situation. This collective situation of mourning, Regan must begin the healing process with his words of hope. The only action that the audience can take was to continue to trust the NASA space program in light of this tragedy. To have faith again in space exploration even though wounded now. President Regan achieved his goal of consoling Americans and concealing the cause of the crisis, by rhetorically framing the situation as status quo.

Here is a fine example of an observed strategic patterns found in many tragedy address’ or crisis speeches that help constitute the artifact being analyzed with a generic criticism lens. When the audience is connected to the disaster or crisis in an emotional way, the rhetor must stay ahead of the questions of blame. Who is the blame for this tragedy? “No one” says the rhetor, “these things happen,”. Sonja K. Foss says in Rhetorical Criticism Exploration and Practice that "genres influence you to develop your message in particular ways - they serve as prescriptive, ready-made patterns of communication that you can use as templates," (180). This offensive verbiage, as in staying out front of the questions before they arise, will be found as a ready-made strategy in the genre of tragedy address.

The best visual evidence that suggests Regan was successful in his use of delivery was when he said, “give me a challenge, and I’ll meet it with joy”. At 1:36 of his speech as Regan said “give”, his brow lightens, his eyes lift, and a small smile emerges on his face for the duration of this quote, and then immediately returned to the somber furrowed brow look. Regan was a trained actor and was effectively able to change and move through emotions and facial expressions long before he was a U.S. President. The ability to have earnest expressions and show compelling emotions makes it easier to persuade an audience to the rhetor’s favor and heed his message. When Regan lifts his brow and smiles ever so strategically, it gave the audience hope and hope leads way to trust, and trust leads way to unity and faith in NASA Space Program. In this kind of tragic moment, if one smiles too long or too wide, it looks inappropriate or staged. The entire dynamic of the speech was mourning a tragedy, but at 1:36 Regan found a way to insert a dose of joy, and finding an appropriate dose of joy in this terrible moment was needed by all. Regan spoon-fed much needed hope right to millions of Americans. The smile was calculated with the precise word of “joy” to have an impact and the lasting effect was hope and faith restored in NASA.

National disasters like Pearl Harbor, September 11th, COVID -19, all required situational rhetoric, with the existence of the exigence, audience, and constraint, but also the speeches connected to these events fall into genre of crisis rhetoric as well.

Here is an example of another address of a national tragedy by the U.S. President Franklin D. Roosevelt on December 7th 1941. The exigence was the attack on Pearl Harbor, the audience was the American people, and the constraint was the fear of more lives of Americans lost at war. Again, we see a U.S. president taking situational rhetoric to address a national tragedy and implementing frame-works of similar speeches of the same genre. The president must stay ahead of the audience and press and at the same time give hope of victory to the nation.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pU1HycD_0p4

For example, another national tragedy that required the genre of crisis rhetoric was President George Bush’s address regarding Hurricane Katrina.

With the genre of tragedy address or crisis rhetoric there is the tragedy, often a natural disaster like a hurricane. The connective content in these types of speeches is a reassuring patriarchal tone of a father or a U.S. president. A common organizing principle of both the Regan address and the Bush address was to give hope. The rhetor must be able to give the audience hope of a better time. Both presidents after they laid out what happened and why, shifted their tone and words to that of uplifting hope for the nation.

Here is U.S. President George W. Bush in the Rose Garden on September 5th addressing the AP about the national disaster, Hurricane Katrina. The viewer will note that towards the end of both short tragedy address (Regan's and Bush's), the president's tone shifts towards hope, grace, and uplifting Americans.

https://youtu.be/P70HllXsz1c?si=sCwDfEFqWVK6ASZK

The units of analysis for generic criticism are artifacts having a situation in common, like a tragedy or crisis. There must be substantive and stylistic features within the content of that genre of rhetoric that are similar and comparable to one another. One must be able to analyze the common traits found in tragedy address or crisis rhetoric. Finally, there must be an organizing principle to qualify as a generic method. In this case, the organizing principle is a national crisis with the space shuttle challenger exploding in front of the American people, deeply traumatizing them. Mourning this monumental loss as a nation was a crisis.

Authors Paul ‘t Hart and Karen Tindall in their book chapter entitled, “Understanding Crisis Exploitation: Leadership, Rhetoric and Framing Contests in Response to the Economic Meltdown” from the book, Framing the Global Economic Meltdown, say about the genre of tragedy address and crisis rhetoric is that, “in today’s risk society, disasters typically evoke nagging questions that spell trouble for incumbent leaders: why did they not see this coming?” (25). The content of both addresses must acknowledge upfront that Americans were going to be upset and emotional about a tragedy like the Challenger and a disaster like Hurricane Katrina. These events caused crisis in the American population. The people in charge were going to be questioned and someone is going to have to be blamed. In crisis rhetoric and tragedy addresses, the rhetor must present with a “this has never happened before” or “it’s a cruel natural disaster that we could do nothing about” mentality. The speech must stay ahead of mass blame, and we see that in both addresses. It’s no one’s fault, and now we must unite in hope and move forward as a country.

In the case of the space shuttle challenger, the writers and producers of the Netflix original docuseries, “Challenger: The Final Flight”, speculate that NASA was aware of the faulty ring that caused the explosion and had several failed launches. One could argue that at this point in the speech, “we’ve never had a tragedy like this,” that President Regan was lying to the American people. He was using crisis rhetoric tactics of covering up the questions of how and why this could ever happened before they arose in the audience.

https://www.netflix.com/watch/81012171?trackId=255824129

https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt24hf3m.4

In this introductory paragraph, the units of analysis for situational criticism are in full effect with the exigence (the problem), audience (those who must be able to change heart or take action), and constraints (factors that limit or influence the audience’s action). The problem is that the shuttle crashed, and Americans are devastated and will lose faith in the NASA space program. The audience is the American people, the same people who witnessed the tragedy earlier in the day and were listening to the President speech that same evening. The constraint is that such a terrible event occurred live on TV with so many families emotionally invested in the outcome and nothing they could do but mourn. According to Lloyd F. Bitzer in his article, “The Rhetorical Situation” from the journal, Philosophy & Rhetoric, he states regarding situational rhetoric is that “a work of rhetoric is pragmatic; it comes into existence for the sake of something beyond itself; it functions ultimately to produce action or change in the world; it preforms some task,” (3). The tragedy address is situational discourse because the speech is only happening because the shuttle exploded, otherwise the President would have been giving the State of the Union Address. The desired action of the audience is to have hope, heal, and to not lose faith in NASA.

http://proxy.wexler.hunter.cuny.edu/login?url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/40236733

Ronald Regan was the 40th U.S. President and on January 26th of the year 1986, he was slated to give the yearly State of the Union Address. However, the space shuttle Challenger had just exploded during takeoff a few hours earlier on live TV. The Challenger was set to bring the first civilian into space, a beloved teacher named, Christa McAuliffe. President Regan had to use various means of persuasion during his speech to console a crushed and heartbroken nation, as well as rebuild American’s confidence in the NASA Space Program in the face of this tragedy. This paper will analyze the canons of rhetoric, particularly the combination of the president’s ethos and his delivery, to persuade the American public into trusting the NASA Space Program again after such a national loss. Beyond the neo-Aristotelian approach, a further analysis of this artifact will use the secondary method’s, situational criticism, and generic criticism to reveal Regan’s rhetorical mastery.

Below is a video from ABC Nightly News with Lester Holt aired on January 28th, 1986 the day of the launch of the Space Shuttle Challenger. This video will give a sense of the dire situation at hand and how that required situational rhetoric. Furthermore, this video will exemplify why and how this tragedy speech can be analyzed with the generic method of criticism and placed in its own genre of speeches called crisis rhetoric. As one can view in the video, America was in crisis.

https://youtu.be/yibNEcn-4yQ?si=wbe2X8arIxYnVc0E