The example of persuasion that I found interesting occurred on May 16, 2017. When National Security Advisor H. R McMaster at a press conference regarding President Trump sharing highly classified information with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and Russian Ambassador to the U.S. Sergey Kislayak during a White House meeting. The information that was disclosed could endanger intelligence sources involving strategies against Islamic State of Iran and Syria (ISIS) A former intelligence official reveal to CBS news that the U S President shared “something inappropriate with the Russian Leader” Nevertheless, General McMaster attempted to convince the media and the American viewers that these actions were appropriate and doesn’t jeopardize national security.
McMasters initially stated on Monday May 16, 2017 that the allegations that information was shared was “false “. However, on Tuesday at a press conference the General did reveal that the president did share information to the Russian, but he insisted that the information that the information was “wholly appropriate.” During the …show more content…
Especially, when the opportunity exists to dismiss things that are false and focus on the truth. When dealing with high sensitive information it is imperative to be honest without compromising intelligence and national security. Therefore, it is understood that certain question will not receive a concrete answer. Unfortunately, it is obvious that hostilely exist between the communicator and the receivers, so both parties can influence how the information is transmitted and received. However, McMaster comments contained multiple layers of confusing responses. His comments didn’t technically change, but as the general field more questions he added elements to his responses that seemed appealing, but never provided a solid answer. Which can create ethical
McMasters initially stated on Monday May 16, 2017 that the allegations that information was shared was “false “. However, on Tuesday at a press conference the General did reveal that the president did share information to the Russian, but he insisted that the information that the information was “wholly appropriate.” During the …show more content…
Especially, when the opportunity exists to dismiss things that are false and focus on the truth. When dealing with high sensitive information it is imperative to be honest without compromising intelligence and national security. Therefore, it is understood that certain question will not receive a concrete answer. Unfortunately, it is obvious that hostilely exist between the communicator and the receivers, so both parties can influence how the information is transmitted and received. However, McMaster comments contained multiple layers of confusing responses. His comments didn’t technically change, but as the general field more questions he added elements to his responses that seemed appealing, but never provided a solid answer. Which can create ethical