Analyze Ethos, Logos, Pathos, And Kairos In The Goodyear Pol ✓ Solved

Analyze ethos, logos, pathos, and kairos in the Goodyear Pol

Analyze ethos, logos, pathos, and kairos in the Goodyear Polyglass advertisement ("The Most Sexist Ad of All Time"). Identify elements of each appeal in the ad, evaluate their effectiveness for the intended audience, and explain why these rhetorical concepts have endured and remain relevant. Use the provided handout definitions and the video as your primary text; cite sources as needed.

Paper For Above Instructions

Introduction

This analysis examines the Goodyear Polyglass television advertisement (commonly labeled "The Most Sexist Ad of All Time") through the classical rhetorical categories of ethos, logos, pathos, and kairos. Using the provided handout definitions of these appeals, I identify specific elements of the ad, evaluate their effectiveness for the intended mid-20th-century audience, and explain why these rhetorical concepts have persisted for 2,500 years and remain useful tools for rhetorical analysis today (Aristotle, trans. 2004; Bitzer, 1968).

Definitions and analytical framework

Ethos concerns the speaker’s or sender’s credibility and character; logos concerns logical appeals and evidence; pathos addresses emotional or value-based appeals; kairos addresses timeliness and situational appropriateness of the message (Aristotle, trans. 2004; Bitzer, 1968). These categories form an analytic framework that helps us see how persuasion operates in multimodal texts such as historical television commercials (Perloff, 2010; Foss & Griffin, 2019).

Ethos in the Goodyear Polyglass ad

The ad builds ethos primarily through institutional branding and implied authority. The Goodyear name and product framing as a technologically superior tire create brand credibility (Leiss, Kline, & Jhally, 2005). The commercial also relies on social norms of the time to project an "expert" domestic authority: the male narrator and male-focused audience cues suggest that the advertiser speaks from a position of mainstream cultural legitimacy. The ethos is therefore corporate and normative rather than expert-scientific; Goodyear’s reputation and the ad’s confident, matter-of-fact tone function to reassure consumers (Jhally, 1990). For the ad’s intended 1960s–1970s audience, this institutional ethos likely increased trust and purchase intent (Goffman, 1979).

Logos in the ad

Logos is present but minimal and often subordinated to other appeals. The ad makes implicit logical claims about product performance—Polyglass construction improves tire life or safety—and it may show simple causal sequences or comparisons to support that claim. However, the ad mostly implies the benefits through staged scenes and assumptions rather than detailed data or technical explanation. In rhetorical terms, logos here is more an implied warrant—"better technology = better tires"—than an evidence-driven argument (Toulmin, 2003). For an audience less focused on technical details, this lean logos was sufficient when paired with strong social appeals.

Pathos in the ad

Pathos is the dominant appeal in this commercial. The imagery and narrative manipulate social emotions: domesticity, gendered roles, humor at the expense of women’s autonomy, and reassurance to male viewers about control and competence. The ad likely uses a staged vignette that reduces a woman to a stereotyped role to elicit laughter or approval from a mainstream audience that accepted such portrayals. Emotional cues—music, punchline timing, and visual emphasis—aim to connect product attributes to everyday feelings of safety, convenience, or status (Goffman, 1979; Jhally, 1990). For the intended viewers of that era, these appeals likely produced quick affective alignment with the brand; for modern viewers, the pathos registers as offensive or alienating.

Kairos and historical timing

Kairos explains much of the ad’s original effectiveness. Kairos refers to the opportune moment and the cultural context in which a message is persuasive (Bitzer, 1968). In the socio-cultural moment of the 1960s and early 1970s, mainstream advertising frequently relied on gendered stereotypes and normative family roles. The ad’s tone, humor, and appeals matched prevailing expectations, making it timely and effective then (Leiss et al., 2005). Fifty years later, cultural shifts—feminist critique, changing consumer values, and heightened sensitivity to representation—render the same strategies ineffective or counterproductive (Dixon & Linz, 2000). Thus kairos demonstrates that persuasive form depends on historical and audience context.

Effectiveness for the intended audience

Evaluated against the attitudes and media norms of its original viewing population, the ad was likely effective. Its strong pathos, supported by corporate ethos and simple logos, aligned with mainstream gender norms and consumer expectations, facilitating brand recall and purchase motivation (Perloff, 2010). However, effectiveness is contingent: the ad’s strategies would alienate many contemporary viewers and could damage brand reputation today. This contrast underscores how kairos and audience analysis are essential parts of rhetorical strategy (Bitzer, 1968).

Why these rhetorical concepts have endured

Ethos, logos, pathos, and kairos endure because they map onto fundamental dimensions of human persuasion: character and trustworthiness, reasoning and evidence, emotion and values, and situational appropriateness (Aristotle, trans. 2004). These categories are flexible across media and cultures and can be combined in varied proportions to fit rhetorical contexts (Perloff, 2010). They remain pedagogically useful because they offer clear, testable lenses for analyzing both historical and contemporary texts, from political speeches to digital advertising (Foss & Griffin, 2019).

Conclusion and implications

The Goodyear Polyglass ad demonstrates a rhetorical package tuned to its historical context: dominant pathos and ethos, modest logos, and strong kairos. While persuasive for its original audience, the ad’s reliance on demeaning gender stereotypes now undermines its effectiveness and highlights ethical and reputational risks in messaging. Using classical rhetorical categories exposes both why the ad worked then and why similar appeals may fail now. Contemporary communicators benefit from combining rhetorical awareness with cultural sensitivity: ethos, logos, pathos, and kairos remain powerful, but responsible persuasion requires aligning appeals with inclusive, ethical values (Foss & Griffin, 2019; Leiss et al., 2005).

References

• Aristotle. (2004). Rhetoric (W. Rhys Roberts, Trans.). Dover Publications. (Original work c. 4th century BCE).
• Bitzer, L. F. (1968). The rhetorical situation. Philosophy & Rhetoric, 1(1), 1–14.
• Perloff, R. M. (2010). The dynamics of persuasion: Communication and attitudes in the 21st century. Routledge.
• Foss, S. K., & Griffin, C. L. (2019). Readings in rhetorical criticism. University of Texas Press.
• Leiss, W., Kline, S., & Jhally, S. (2005). Social communication in advertising: Consumption in the mediated marketplace. Routledge.
• Goffman, E. (1979). Gender advertisements. Harper & Row.
• Jhally, S. (1990). The codes of advertising: Fetishism and the political economy of meaning in the consumer society. In Visual culture: Studies in the social production of meaning (pp. 173–193). Routledge.
• Toulmin, S. (2003). The uses of argument. Cambridge University Press. (Original work 1958).
• Dixon, T. L., & Linz, D. (2000). Overrepresentation and underrepresentation of African Americans and Latinos as lawbreakers on television news. Journal of Communication, 50(2), 131–154.
• University of Louisville Writing Center. (n.d.). Logos, Ethos, Pathos, Kairos. uofl.edu/writingcenter. (Handout referenced in assignment and used for definitions).
• Goodyear Polyglas commercial. (c. 1960s–1970s). The Most Sexist Ad of All Time [Video]. YouTube. (Primary text analyzed).