The Relevancy of Rhetorical Velocity (Prompt 2)

In Jim Ridolfo and Martine Courant Rife's article "Rhetorical Velocity and Copyright", they argue the role of rhetorical velocity in creations. More than just being in the title, rhetorical velocity functions as the backbone of the article and the definitions of delivery, appropriation, and recomposition (" Rhetorical velocity is a strategic concept of delivery in which a rhetor theorizes the possibilities for the recomposition of a text (e.g., a media release) based on how s/he anticipates how the text might later be used."(229)) In delivery, rhetorical velocity is applied to how a creation is presented, such as whether it will be presented in the public sphere or the private sphere. In appropriation, it helps to consider how an idea will be reinterpreted. In recomposition, rhetorical velocity helps elucidate how a creation can be rearranged and reused.

Rhetorical velocity plays a role in delivery. In this case, the student had to use rhetorical velocity to consider how the delivery of her message affected her message. In Ridolfo and Rife's case study, a student had created a snowball fight outdoors in a public area to draw attention to her cause. A photographer for the university had taken photos of her playing in the snow, and the university had reused the images for admissions advertisements. While the student claimed that she wanted the idea of her cause to spread, she had no concept of how her attempt of drawing attention to it would be used ("Although the desired press coverage of the March 3 action was achieved (see Figure 2), Maggie had no way of anticipating how the university would later use an image of her from the event to promote the Department of Student Life and the university itself." (226-228)) So while her attempt to get her cause noticed worked, because of its delivery in the public sphere, she could not control the deletion of the idea. Rhetorical velocity could have helped the student to consider how to protect her cause's identity and still have it be relevant without having it be reinterpreted for other purposes. In this case, the student would have to consider how to protect her idea. Ridolfo and Rife suggested signs around the area (228), and the student considered creating a free speech area to delivery her message.

Appropriation in rhetorical velocity is relevant. In this case, appropriation refers to how an idea is used, "something" being images or ideas. In this case study, the university had appropriated her image by separating it from the cause and applying it to something else. This was allowed because the student performed the action in a public area (231). The student in this case used rhetorical velocity to reconsider how she could prevent her images and ideas from being used in the wrong way ("Although Maggie never consented to or approved of the university using her image for these large-scale advertising purposes, she talked about what she could have done differently to curtail the appropriation of her image. She says that it might have been “a good idea to have more prominent posters or things with you or have things with you so people know what’s going on.”"(228)) For example, Westboro Baptist Church creates parodies to draw attention to their message. In this case, they reappropriate the songs and transform them into messages of their ideas, and the corporations that they had borrowed from cannot really pursue them to court because they aren't directly changing the songs themselves. However, if WBC took an entire song, didn't change it, and then claimed it was theirs, there would be an issue.

Ridolfo and Rife also consider recomposition in the role of rhetorical velocity. In this case, recomposition is defined as how media can be rearranged and reused. In Ridolfo and Rife's case study, Maggie's images were recomposed by the university to be used for admission advertisements. Rhetorical velocity plays a role in recomposition because one must consider how their composition will be reused once it is issued out into the public. Ridolfo and Rife claim that "In other words, we need to stop thinking about copyright law in terms of what isn’t possible, but also in terms of what is possible—that is, how rhetors can strategically compose for the recomposition of their own intellectual property."(241) Something similar had happened when a mother sued a pro life organization for using her daughter's image in an anti abortion ad. The mother claimed that her daughter's image was recomposed to imply that black families had higher abortion rates. Recomposition, appropriation, and delivery all have their role in rhetorical velocity. They must be considered when creating a work and releasing it to the public, so that the original author's ideas can be maintained while allowing creators to do their work.