Bailey Oratorical Reflection

I went to one of the early rounds where they were choosing who would go through. I was supporting a friend who didn’t end up making it through, and two of the people who were in the finals were in that group. Overall I was disappointed by it. In comparison to the people who made it through, the people who didn’t go through had much more passionate speeches. The topic was about being counted, and it felt a bit odd to me that a person who got through was someone who came from a relatively privileged place writing about other people. As opposed to stories that were more personal and passionate. It was good writing, and the speeches were good, but it didn’t feel like they covered the topic of being counted, or not being counted. I’m glad Rachel won first, she definitely deserved to win. I feel that because I went to the preliminary one and saw my friend share such a personal story, receive only positive comments on it, and then not make it through it was hard for me to be impartial when watching the finals. There is also the fact that people who did well in previous Baileys got to compete again, which feels unfair to students who haven’t had that chance.

Now into a part that me and my friends discussed heavily but I am hesitant to add. The fact that Madison Troha got through, and got second in something about being counted or not, when in comparison other people had objectively better speeches. Add onto the fact that a couple people had participated in previous Baileys, and most were communication students, we all just felt kind of weird about it. We talked about it a lot, and the main thing that we felt might have been a reason is the speeches being general and less passionate can appeal to a wider audience than personal, passionate speeches about serious subjects.