Somaly Mam is a well-known public speaker and human sex trafficking activist. On May 8th 2012, she spoke about her work with human sex trafficking in Cambodia, her organization Somaly Mam Foundation, as well as a little about herself. She gave this talk at the Oslo Freedom Forum, but I watched the speech on Youtube where it has 5,204 views, so this speech has reached many. She started off her speech by telling her story, a heartbreaking and touching one. She herself was sold into sex slavery at a brothel and was raped daily. The choice to tell her compelling story was a good and interesting way to open the speech and get the audience’s attention. Right from the start she gained attention, sympathy, and trust by sharing her story of survival.
…show more content…
She only glanced at her notes a few times, and it was evident that she practiced the speech. Her delivery was effective for the most part. Good delivery is defined as a manner that “…does not call attention to itself. It conveys the speaker’s ideas clearly, interestingly, and without distracting the audience” (Lucas 240). She is well educated on the topic, mostly due to her own personal experiences with it. Her first-hand experience of what goes on in the human sex trafficking industry is part of what made her such a powerful speaker on the topic. The general purpose was to inform the audience about her story and her work with the human sex trafficking industry. She wasn’t overtly trying to persuade someone to have a specific attitude towards the subject. She had a clear topic and purpose to the speech, which is important because “it helps keep the audience at the center of your attention” (Lucas 83). Although she had good delivery, her speech was lacking in conversational quality, which is “presenting a speech so it sounds spontaneous no matter how many times it has been rehearsed” (Lucas 242). The speech had good nonverbal communication because she used her body and voice effectively to clearly express her ideas. She had minor inflections in her voice, which are “changes in pitch or tone” (Lucas 244). Her slightly repetitive pitch pattern could distract the audience. Her …show more content…
She gave a speech to the UN on April 3rd, 2012, and in it falsely claimed that 8 individuals died after the Cambodian army raided one of her organization’s centers in 2004 (Marks, 1 of 4). It was later revealed that this was not the case. She stated that she misinterpreted the information from her source. It was also revealed by her ex-husband that she lied about her daughter’s kidnapping. She claimed her daughter was taken by human traffickers as retaliation for her work. Her ex-husband believes that it was an effort to raise awareness and support for the Somaly Mam Foundation (Marks, 4 of 4). Her “subtle form of dishonesty” by fudging statistics or quoting the source wrong was “just as unethical” than straight out lies (Lucas 34). Her actions infringed upon “the speaker’s duty to be accurate and fair in presenting information” (Lucas 34). As stated by Stephen E. Lucas, “your first responsibility as a speaker is to ask whether your goals are ethically sound” (Lucas 31). Her goals may not have been ethically sound because she has a personal view of the situation. Her desire for awareness and support for this issue may have clouded her judgement caused her to alter her speech in a way that was favorable to the cause, but may not have been truthful. While she didn’t plagiarize, which is one form of an ethical issue or violation, she did inaccurately state information and
She only glanced at her notes a few times, and it was evident that she practiced the speech. Her delivery was effective for the most part. Good delivery is defined as a manner that “…does not call attention to itself. It conveys the speaker’s ideas clearly, interestingly, and without distracting the audience” (Lucas 240). She is well educated on the topic, mostly due to her own personal experiences with it. Her first-hand experience of what goes on in the human sex trafficking industry is part of what made her such a powerful speaker on the topic. The general purpose was to inform the audience about her story and her work with the human sex trafficking industry. She wasn’t overtly trying to persuade someone to have a specific attitude towards the subject. She had a clear topic and purpose to the speech, which is important because “it helps keep the audience at the center of your attention” (Lucas 83). Although she had good delivery, her speech was lacking in conversational quality, which is “presenting a speech so it sounds spontaneous no matter how many times it has been rehearsed” (Lucas 242). The speech had good nonverbal communication because she used her body and voice effectively to clearly express her ideas. She had minor inflections in her voice, which are “changes in pitch or tone” (Lucas 244). Her slightly repetitive pitch pattern could distract the audience. Her …show more content…
She gave a speech to the UN on April 3rd, 2012, and in it falsely claimed that 8 individuals died after the Cambodian army raided one of her organization’s centers in 2004 (Marks, 1 of 4). It was later revealed that this was not the case. She stated that she misinterpreted the information from her source. It was also revealed by her ex-husband that she lied about her daughter’s kidnapping. She claimed her daughter was taken by human traffickers as retaliation for her work. Her ex-husband believes that it was an effort to raise awareness and support for the Somaly Mam Foundation (Marks, 4 of 4). Her “subtle form of dishonesty” by fudging statistics or quoting the source wrong was “just as unethical” than straight out lies (Lucas 34). Her actions infringed upon “the speaker’s duty to be accurate and fair in presenting information” (Lucas 34). As stated by Stephen E. Lucas, “your first responsibility as a speaker is to ask whether your goals are ethically sound” (Lucas 31). Her goals may not have been ethically sound because she has a personal view of the situation. Her desire for awareness and support for this issue may have clouded her judgement caused her to alter her speech in a way that was favorable to the cause, but may not have been truthful. While she didn’t plagiarize, which is one form of an ethical issue or violation, she did inaccurately state information and