Ethos, Pathos, and Logos in Public Relations

Ethos, pathos, and logos play an import­ant role in PR.

Some people need right­eous argu­ments to be per­suaded. Some need emo­tion­al ones. Others need logic­al argu­ments to come around.

But for most of us, a com­bin­a­tion of the three is needed.

Ethos, pathos, and logos are three power­ful modes of per­sua­sion in pub­lic relations. 

Here we go:

Ethos, Pathos, and Logos in Public Relations

Spin Academy | Online PR Courses

Ethos, Pathos, and Logos: Three Classical Modes of Persuasion

“Aristotle’s three modes of rhet­or­ic­al per­sua­sion are eth­os, pathos, and logos, which are based on mor­al com­pet­ence, emo­tion­al appeal, and reas­on.”
Source: Sino-US English Teaching ¹Lin, W. (2019). Three Modes of Rhetorical Persuasion. Sino-US English Teaching. https://​doi​.org/​1​0​.​1​7​2​6​5​/​1​539 – ⁸⁰⁷²⁄₂₀₁₉.03.003

Ethos, pathos, and logos are three modes of per­sua­sion recog­nised since ancient Greece, and they play an essen­tial role in pub­lic relations. 

• Ethos. This mode of per­sua­sion refers to the cred­ib­il­ity or eth­ic­al appeal of the com­mu­nic­at­or, which can be estab­lished through demon­strat­ing expert­ise, integ­rity, and goodwill.
• Pathos. This mode of per­sua­sion per­tains to emo­tion­al appeal, which involves stir­ring the audience’s feel­ings to sway their opin­ions or actions.
• Logos. This mode of per­sua­sion is the logic­al appeal, which relies on present­ing sound argu­ments and evid­ence to con­vince the audience.

In PR, these three modes of per­sua­sion are often com­bined to cre­ate com­pel­ling mes­sages that res­on­ate with the audi­ence on mul­tiple levels. ²Modes of per­sua­sion. (2023, September 27). In Wikipedia. https://​en​.wiki​pe​dia​.org/​w​i​k​i​/​M​o​d​e​s​_​o​f​_​p​e​r​s​u​a​s​ion

By under­stand­ing and apply­ing the prin­ciples of eth­os, pathos, and logos, PR pro­fes­sion­als can craft mes­sages that res­on­ate deeply with their audi­ence, driv­ing action and fos­ter­ing last­ing relationships.

Learn more: Ethos, Pathos, and Logos in Public Relations

💡 Subscribe and get a free ebook on how to get bet­ter PR ideas.

PR Resource: Persuasion

Spin Academy | Online PR Courses

Doctor Spin’s PR School: Free Persuasion PR Course

Use this free Persuasion PR Course to elev­ate your pub­lic rela­tions game with power­ful insights. Drive impact and influ­ence like nev­er before.

• Persuasion Definition, Meaning, and Ethics
• Persuasion Strategies (and When To Use Them)
• Persuasion Techniques
• The Golden Rule of Persuasion
• Priming in PR: The Subtle Art of Pre-Suasion
• Framing in PR: How To Bypass Confirmation Bias
• Ethos, Pathos, and Logos in Public Relations
• The Priming Wheel: 12 Steps to Yes
• “Pre-Suasion” by Robert B. Cialdini (to be published)
• The Value Triangle: How To Manage Client Expectations
• The Power of Artificial Scarcity

Learn more: All Free PR Courses

💡 Subscribe and get a free ebook on how to get bet­ter PR ideas.

PR Resource: Amplification Hypothesis

Spin Academy | Online PR Courses

The Amplification Hypothesis

It’s com­mon to find that coun­ter­ar­gu­ments strengthen exist­ing beliefs instead of weak­en­ing them. 

• The harder you attack someone verbally, the more you con­vince them of their belief, not yours.

The phe­nomen­on is known as the amp­li­fic­a­tion hypo­thes­is, where dis­play­ing cer­tainty about an atti­tude when talk­ing with anoth­er per­son increases and hardens that attitude.

“Across exper­i­ments, it is demon­strated that increas­ing atti­tude cer­tainty strengthens atti­tudes (e.g., increases their res­ist­ance to per­sua­sion) when atti­tudes are uni­valent but weak­ens atti­tudes (e.g., decreases their res­ist­ance to per­sua­sion) when atti­tudes are ambi­val­ent. These res­ults are con­sist­ent with the amp­li­fic­a­tion hypo­thes­is.“
Source: Journal of Personality and Social Psychology ³Clarkson, J. J., Tormala, Z. L., & Rucker, D. D. (2008). A new look at the con­sequences of atti­tude cer­tainty: The amp­li­fic­a­tion hypo­thes­is. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, … Continue read­ing

How does the amp­li­fic­a­tion hypo­thes­is work? 

In a threat­en­ing situ­ation or emer­gency, we resort to the prim­al (fast­est) part of the brain and sur­viv­al instincts (fight, flight and freeze). ⁴Surviving the Storm: Understanding the Nature of Attacks held at Animal Care Expo, 2011 in Orlando, FL.

• Dichotomous think­ing. This think­ing style is at the heart of rad­ic­al move­ments and fun­da­ment­al­ism. Even people who exer­cise abstract think­ing, logic, reas­on, and the abil­ity to recog­nize com­plex issues can resort to this think­ing style when threatened. ⁵Silfwer, J. (2017, June 13). Conversion Theory — Disproportionate Minority Influence. Doctor Spin | The PR Blog. https://​doc​tor​spin​.net/​c​o​n​v​e​r​s​i​o​n​-​t​h​e​o​ry/
• Egocentric think­ing. People who demon­strate non-ego­centric think­ing in many areas can also use this think­ing style under stress. When a tar­get is labelled an enemy, cog­nit­ive steps jus­ti­fy viol­ent beha­viour and pre­vent altru­ism and empathy. ⁶Beck (1999): Homogenization, Dehumanization and Demonization.
• Distorted think­ing. We tend to ignore details in our envir­on­ments that do not sup­port our think­ing and beliefs. ⁷Cognitive dis­son­ance. (2023, November 20). In Wikipedia. https://​en​.wiki​pe​dia​.org/​w​i​k​i​/​C​o​g​n​i​t​i​v​e​_​d​i​s​s​o​n​a​nce

Establishing com­mon ground and exhib­it­ing empathy demon­strates a genu­ine under­stand­ing of their per­spect­ive, fos­ter­ing trust and open­ness to your ideas. Conversely, a stra­tegic mis­match of atti­tudes can serve as a power­ful coun­ter­meas­ure if your object­ive is to deflect per­suas­ive attempts.

Persuade

To per­suade, align your atti­tude with the tar­get. Otherwise, you will only act to cre­ate resistance.

Provoke

To put off a per­suader, mis­match their atti­tudes. When they are logic­al, be emo­tion­al, and vice versa. 

Learn more: The Amplification Hypothesis: How To Counter Extreme Positions

💡 Subscribe and get a free ebook on how to get bet­ter PR ideas.

PR Resource: Perception Management

Walter Lippmann: Public Opinion and Perception Management

No one bases their atti­tudes and beha­viours on real­ity; we base them on our per­cep­tions of real­ity.

Walter Lippmann (1889 – 1974) pro­posed that our per­cep­tions of real­ity dif­fer from the actu­al real­ity. The real­ity is too vast and too com­plex for any­one to pro­cess. ⁸Lippmann, Walter. 1960. Public Opinion (1922). New York: Macmillan.

The research on per­cep­tion man­age­ment is focused on how organ­isa­tions can cre­ate a desired reputation:

“The OPM [Organizational Perception Management] field focuses on the range of activ­it­ies that help organ­isa­tions estab­lish and/​or main­tain a desired repu­ta­tion (Staw et al., 1983). More spe­cific­ally, OPM research has primar­ily focused on two inter­re­lated factors: (1) the tim­ing and goals of per­cep­tion man­age­ment activ­it­ies and (2) spe­cif­ic per­cep­tion man­age­ment tac­tics (Elsbach, 2006).”
Source: Organization Development Journal ⁹Hargis, M. & Watt, John. (2010). Organizational per­cep­tion man­age­ment: A frame­work to over­come crisis events. Organization Development Journal. 28. 73 – 87. … Continue read­ing

Today, our per­cep­tions are heav­ily influ­enced by news media, influ­en­cers, algorithms, and social graphs. Therefore, per­cep­tion man­age­ment is more crit­ic­al than ever.

“We are all cap­tives of the pic­ture in our head — our belief that the world we have exper­i­enced is the world that really exists.”
— Walter Lippmann (1889 – 1974)

Learn more: Walter Lippmann: Public Opinion and Perception Management