#Voicepost
The message contained in any piece of written communication relies upon a number of factors for it to be effective in achieving its goal. Indeed, factors such as the target audience, the writer’s socio-cultural orientation, and the timing of the message are all profoundly important. However, the voice through which the message is delivered goes a long way in determining whether the message will resonate with its intended audience. While aspects such as choice of words and phrasing are critical in analyzing voice, the content is the primary driver behind a particular voice. Dave Clark’s voice will be analyzed hereunder. He is a blogger for the Sound at Heart website, providing commentary on matters sports. A former Army veteran, Dave also pursues interests in the coffee industry.
In this blog spot, Keep politics out of sports, they said, Clark seeks to debunk the myth that sports and politics cannot functionally co-exist in the same space. By highlighting several prominent sportsmen who have taken controversial positions over multiple issues, he explores the place of sport in furthering political dialogue. One key takeaway from Clark’s voice in this piece is that it strikes a reasonable tone by aspiring to achieve the balance between sport as a form of escapism and as a platform to address societal issues. This is achieved by first highlighting the former. Clark (2016) asserts:
“But at the same time, sports is an avoidance. That is probably why I’m a sports fan. As a soldier in the US Army, sports, mostly baseball and basketball, were how I avoided thinking about the Army. It was how I avoided thinking about having a “go bag.” Sports helped me maintain a connection with home despite a deployment to Kuwait (in ’97, I was blessed). This was also where I experienced my first national team experiences, as Kuwait hosted Saudi Arabia and Qatar trying to qualify for World Cup 1998”.
The essence of this is that Clark’s voice does not alienate one side of the debate; those who advocate for keeping politics out of sport.
By maintaining this aura of reasonability, Clark’s voice is able to foster an aura of civility and open-mindedness in a debate that is known to generate strong sentiments across the divide. This is evidenced by his choice of words. For example, he asserts that sports are an ‘amazing unifier’. Moreover, by using words such as ‘hurting’ and ‘healing’ Clark is able to raise the urgency of issues such as racial discrimination while at the same time calling all to action with the view of addressing the challenges bedeviling the American society. Additionally, phrases such as ‘we will help’ add to reinforce a sense of sensitivity and maturity in the voice used to deliver the message.
By incorporating the input of Matt Ufford, a veteran, and by sharing his own perspective as a veteran, Clark is able to dispel the notion that advocating for civil rights is at odds with the First Amendment and respect for the American military (Clark 1). Choosing to include such content in the message has the effect of broadening the space for debate over the issues that the article raises. It makes it clear that calling attention to these issues is not synonymous with denigrating some of the nation’s hallowed institutions. All these point to a voice that is calling for sober dialogue on issues that are wont to raise temperatures. Nothing portrays this fact better than the concluding phrase; “We listen. We act. We improve.”.
����
