Rhetorical Analysis in Jacinda Ardern’s Omicron Update Essay Example

Jacinda Ardern, New Zealand Prime Minister, gave a compelling announcement two weeks ago about the current COVID pandemic providing details about what their country is doing right to avoid it. She starts off with a reminder that Omicron is real and will hit the country at some point. She moves on to vaccination rates for those in the country making the listener understand how much work is already being done. Furthermore, she discusses the effectiveness of the booster and emphasizes its importance in defending against Omicron. As she winds down to the finish, she talks about what happens when the new wave does hit and how the people will be forced to react. The Prime Minister concludes with a hopeful message about the future and putting family first. Ardern’s effective use of rhetorical devices keep the citizens of her country calm and brave for the future of COVID.

The speaker for this speech is the Prime Minister of New Zealand, Jacinda Ardern. The stage took place two weeks ago as COVID-19’s omicron variant started its spread. Ardern gives a serious talk to her country, and to the world, about what should and is being done to prevent Omicron from getting highly prevalent in their country. As known around the world, New Zealand worked very well over the course of COVID to minimize risks and spread. Notably, they did not surpass 1000 active cases until late October in 2021 when it started to really hit hard (New Zealand). The Prime Minister extensively uses logos to map her points, which makes sense given the serious tone. Pathos and kairos are also used to make the arguments flow well, but we do not see much ethos, which would help with her trustworthiness, if any New Zealanders were to not like her as a person. She goes through the statements promptly and does not drift off of the main announcement which makes the speech clear and concise. Most of the listeners probably felt at least somewhat compelled by what she was saying.

Ethos is not used explicitly in the message, but definitely could have strengthened it. Prime Minister Ardern was voted for by the majority of New Zealand, twice as many people voting for her over the other party (New Zealand Election), meaning most of the country will probably look up to her and believe her. Given this however, she does not mention major sources like the CDC or other doctors, but does state:

“When COVID changes, we change [...] With the data and evidence from the experience of other countries to make the best decisions we can based on what we are seeing elsewhere.” (Govt’s)

This portion of the speech mostly uses logos, but is the only place where the speaker states a source of info, the ambiguous ‘other countries’. It makes sense to the audience that the other countries were a sort of metaphorical guinea pig. This is the one point where Ardern states a reason her administration is doing what it is doing. Apart from this, she often says ‘we are doing this’ and ‘we are doing that’, but the ‘we’ always is changing from we, the country to we, the administration, to we, the health experts, etc.. It would help if she used this chance to change up her vocabulary and say something along the lines of ‘the CDC’ or ‘families of New Zealand’. This would improve her appeal to ethos and further make the audience confide in her.

Pathos is highly important in the context of COVID, where some viewers may know or relate to those who have died because of it. Consequently, the Prime Minister uses a good amount of it throughout the speech:

“... it’s the booster that will get us through Omicron, and it will help us in critical ways. While many people who become infected with Omicron will not get critically unwell, others will. The boosters reduce the severity of illness. That means you will be much less likely to end up in [a] hospital than if you don’t receive a booster.” (Govt’s)

Her emphasis on different words really increases the impact of what she says here. She does not use big words or complicated grammatical structures, but it still feels very powerful, while easy to understand. Specifically ‘others will’ makes the listener feel almost threatened because they realize, especially at that moment (kairos), that Omicron still can kill those who are not careful. Her emphasis on ‘don’t’ in ‘if you don’t receive a booster’ makes listeners almost feel foolish or even self-harming for delaying their shots. Near the end of the talk, Ardern gets the audiences’ families involved which ends the speech with an emotional bang (filled with the aforementioned excessive use of ‘we’):

“..., but we don’t need to be fearful. We do however need to prepare. We’re well-placed to take on this next challenge because we’ve always put the important things first, and it ultimately is one another.” (Govt’s)

This conclusion to the speech makes it memorable because through all the number and regulation gibberish the audience has become sick of hearing about for the last two years, Ardern almost intensely makes it about caring for each other, which is usually meant, but not emphasized so clearly in the media. She could have instead made it about we, the country, but instead focused on the individual listener’s family making the speech suddenly personal. Alone, however, emotion cannot sway the average person into believing anything an author states. For that, you need some facts to back the argument up.

Logos is an indispensable appeal used throughout the entire ten minute piece. Cleverly, the Prime Minister incentivizes the unvaccinated portion of the audience to get their COVID boosters, in addition to the shots they already have:

“... and importantly, everyone who has had their second dose of the vaccine four or more months ago, can now receive their booster. The evidence tells us that while two doses of the vaccine makes a huge difference for the delta variant, it’s the booster that will help get us through Omicron” (Govt’s)

Maybe less appealing when read, her tone in the live speech makes this example of logos truly convincing. She states that people are now all able to get their booster, says something almost attention-diverting, and follows it with a general fact about the boosters effectiveness in the coming wave of COVID. This could subconsciously make a viewer connect the dots and think ‘I should get my shot’. Based on the behavior of people here in the US, and around the world, many will not get their shots just because the government is telling them to (Why). With that part of the speech, they can get tricked into believing they thought up the idea of getting the shot themselves. Timing is important here, and any time the Prime Minister introduces some sort of fact.

Kairos is what Ardern uses to make the entire piece flow very well. Her use of timing was near impeccable. Nowhere did the grammar seem forced or out of context, but at the same time, sentences were placed and worded with intention. Read the following introduction to her speech after talking about New Zealand’s northern region’s vaccination rates thriving:

“In fact, the changes in boundaries have not caused an escalation in cases anywhere in the country. This has been as a result of three things, exceptional vaccination rates, our public health teams continuing to stamp out cases when they find them, and the COVID protection framework working as intended.” (Govt’s)

To start off the whole speech, Ardern already has the listener thinking about A: New Zealand patriotism, B: being calm, but cautious about Omicron, and C: a bright future. While maybe seeming useless at first, her use of ‘our public health teams’ laid in this pseudo-victorious introduction, makes the New Zealanders she’s talking to feel like their country is doing all the right things. The audience’s spirits start off high and mighty as they start to delve into the serious stuff. 

Prime Minister Ardern heavily sways the audience throughout this announcement due to  her convincing use of rhetorical appeals. Her info dump didn’t feel so bland because she mixed her logos with pathos to make the plan she had laid out personal. I do feel she could have added more sources in the speech and specifically said ‘the administration’ or ‘the country’ instead of ‘we’ every few words. However her use of timing and distraction really made all the points seem just as impactful as if Ardern did use sources. In fact, stepping out of her way to say ‘According to the Center for Disease Control, …’ could have actually ruined her flow and kairos. In the end, Jacinda Ardern laid out her plan for her country up-front without too much manipulation and it worked very well.

Works Cited

“Govt's COVID Announcement: What Happens When Omicron Outbreak Hits NZ?” YouTube, Newshub, 19 Jan. 2022, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kH7MDGhImu4. Accessed 8 Feb. 2022. 

“New Zealand Election: Jacinda Ardern's Labour Party Scores Landslide Win.” BBC News, BBC, 17 Oct. 2020, https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-54519628. 

“New Zealand.” Worldometer, https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/new-zealand/. 

“Why Adults 18 and Over Did Not Get COVID-19 Vaccine.” Census, US Census Bureau, 14 Dec. 2021, https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/stories/2021/12/who-are-the-adults-not-vaccinated-against-covid-figure-1.jpg. Accessed 8 Feb. 2022.