Practice
Why avoid name-calling in a public speech?
A speaker says, "This proposal leaves out the cost of training." The audience can check that point. If the speaker calls the people behind the proposal names instead, the discussion moves away from the proposal.
Explain why name-calling weakens a public speech and replace a personal attack with a clear criticism of a claim, decision, or behavior.
Read and practice
Read the examples and try the written questions in this guide. Listening recordings are not available for this lesson yet.
Try the written questions
name-calling /ˈneɪm ˌkɔːlɪŋ/
The short answer
Avoid name-calling because it attacks a person or group instead of dealing with the point under discussion. A clear reason and relevant evidence give the audience something they can examine.
I disagree with this plan because it does not show how the new staff will be trained.
Why it works: The speaker identifies one part of the plan and gives a reason for the disagreement.
5 more examples
-
The proposal does not include a cost estimate for the training program.
The speaker points to a missing detail that listeners can check.
Not this:The people behind this proposal
do not know what they are doing. What changes: This judges the people instead of explaining what is missing from the proposal. -
The report needs a source for this number before we rely on it.
The speaker asks for evidence and keeps the focus on the report.
Not this:The writer of this report
cannot be trusted. What changes: This makes a broad judgment about a person without examining the number. -
I am concerned that this rule may make it harder for small shops to stay open.
The concern names a possible effect of the rule.
Not this:
Only selfish peoplesupport this rule. What changes: The sentence labels supporters instead of explaining the concern about small shops. -
The council should publish the meeting notes before asking for public comments.
The speaker makes a direct request about a public action.
Not this:The council members
are a problem. What changes: The label does not tell listeners what action the speaker wants changed. -
Please compare the two studies before you decide which claim to support.
The speaker invites listeners to examine information for themselves.
Not this:Anyone who disagrees
is a problem. What changes: This labels people who disagree and gives them no point to answer.
Read the full guide
When you disagree in public, begin with the subject of the disagreement. Say what the claim or decision is, explain its possible effect, and use evidence when you have it. This keeps the audience focused on the issue rather than on a label for another person.
Separate the person from the point
A disagreement has a subject: a claim, a plan, a decision, or an action. Start there. A listener can consider a specific point, but a label for a person does not explain what should change.
This claim needs a source that shows where the number came from.
The sentence questions the claim and asks for a source. It does not make a judgment about the person who made it.
Which part should a speaker discuss first: the claim or a label for the person who made it?
Discuss the claim first. Listeners need to know the exact point you question.
Give listeners a reason to consider
Name-calling can interrupt the argument because listeners may focus on the attack rather than on the issue. A reason gives the audience a path to follow. Evidence, an example, or a clear consequence can support that reason.
I oppose the change because the notice gives renters only one week to respond.
The sentence states the decision and a concrete reason for opposing it.
What can listeners examine in this sentence: a personal label or the one-week notice period?
They can examine the one-week notice period because it is a specific reason.
Replace a label with a specific concern
If you notice a label in your draft, pause and ask what concern sits behind it. You may be worried about missing information, an unfair effect, or a decision that needs another review. Put that concern into words.
The schedule may exclude people who work late shifts.
This identifies a possible effect of the schedule. It gives the audience a point they can discuss.
Rewrite the concern as a specific point: The schedule needs another review because ___.
One possible answer is: The schedule needs another review because it may exclude people who work late shifts.
Speak firmly about a decision
Respectful language can still be direct. Use clear verbs such as oppose, question, reject, or ask to revise. Then name the decision and the reason. Your audience should be able to tell what you want them to think about or do.
I ask the board to revise this rule because it does not explain how appeals will work.
The speaker makes a firm request and explains the missing information.
Which verb makes a clear request here: ask to revise or call names?
Use ask to revise. It names the action the speaker wants the board to take.
Prepare for a difficult question
A question after a speech may feel personal, especially when people disagree. Take a moment to return to the issue. State the point you can answer, give your reason, and say when you do not have enough information.
I do not have the final figures today, but the report should include them before the vote.
The speaker answers honestly and returns to the information needed for the decision.
What can you say if you do not know an answer during questions?
Say what you know, say what you do not know, and return to the point under discussion.
Before you go
Remember this
In a public speech, name the issue instead of labeling people. Explain what you disagree with, give a reason or evidence, and describe the effect you are concerned about. This gives listeners a clear point to consider and respond to.
Practice with the written examples
You can practice with the written questions in the Learn tab. Each answer includes an explanation.
Try the written questionsListening test not available yet
This lesson does not have the recordings needed for a listening test. Use the written questions in the guide to check your understanding.
Try the written questionsQuestions about "Why avoid name-calling in a public speech?"
What is name-calling in a public speech?
Name-calling uses an insulting label or a broad personal judgment instead of responding to an idea, decision, or action. It can shift the audience's attention away from the point that needs discussion.
The proposal does not include a cost estimate for the training program.
Can I criticize someone without name-calling?
Yes. State the claim, action, or decision you disagree with. Then explain the evidence, effect, or reason for your concern. You can be direct about a harmful action or an unsupported claim without labeling the person involved.
The people behind this proposal do not know what they are doing.
Why can name-calling weaken an argument?
A personal attack gives listeners less information to examine. A reason such as a missing source, an unclear cost, or a possible effect gives the audience a specific point to consider.
The report needs a source for this number before we rely on it.
What can I say instead of using a personal label?
Use a sentence that names the issue: This report needs a source for this number. You can also name an effect: This rule may make it harder for small shops to stay open. Add a reason whenever you can.
The writer of this report cannot be trusted.
Does avoiding name-calling mean I must sound weak?
No. You can say that you oppose, question, or reject a decision. Clear criticism identifies what needs to change and why. That gives your audience a stronger point to evaluate than a label does.
I am concerned that this rule may make it harder for small shops to stay open.