Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Keanu Gomez
University of Kentucky
Ekstrom speech analysis 2
Abstract
This paper serves to examine the rhetorical devices used by Andreas Ekstrom in his TEDx
speech titled, The Moral Bias Behind Your Search Results. It will first summarize the topics
and themes he presents in his speech. It will then discuss and evaluate his use of ethos, logos,
and pathos. In addition, it will analyze the level of persuasion achieved by the speaker and
Keywords: Andreas Ekstrom, Michelle Obama, Anders Breivik, TEDx, search engine
bias, Google
Ekstrom speech analysis 3
Andreas Ekstrom, a Swedish journalist and writer whose work focuses on encouraging
digital equality, was given the opportunity to present a TED speech. In his speech titled, The
Moral Bias Behind Your Search Results, he examines the humanistic qualities that tend to
convinces his audience that even search engines display a discriminatory bias. In his argument,
he juxtaposes two contrasting figures: the first lady of the United States, Michelle Obama; and a
terrorist, Anders Breivik. He tells the story of how these two figures had their image searches
manipulated. Obama had a picture, where her face was morphed as a monkey, searchable under
her name; while Breivik had a picture of dog feces searchable under his. The misrepresentation
under Obamas name was corrected by Google, while the photo of dog poop remained a search
uncover. Ekstrom is able to reveal and criticize the digital inequality that occurs as a result of
search engine bias through his masterful use and manipulation of ethos, logos, and pathos.
Figure 1. The morphed picture of Michelle Obama and a monkey. Retrieved from
https://graneyandthepig.wordpress.com/2009/11/25/google-removes-michelle-obama-monkey-
picture/.
Ekstrom speech analysis 4
Ekstroms first rhetorical appeal to ethos was demonstrated by the establishment of his
credibility. Within the first two minutes of his speech, he arbitrarily claims that he is a man of
the humanities or a digital humanities man. Despite his semi-formal attire and his
professional demeanor, he fails to verbally establish his credibility. However, it can be assumed
that his audience is somewhat aware of his background. After some preliminary research, it can
be found that Ekstrom is a writer of six books who works at Sydsvenskan, a daily newspaper
company in Sweden. His writings and lectures focus on equality in todays digital revolution. In
his speech, he addresses the traditional values and beliefs behind equality. As he crafted his
argument, he utilized the name and stature of the first lady of the United States, Michelle Obama.
He uses her, an admirable, righteous, and popular figure, to attempt to justify Googles removal
of her demeaning photo. Her credibility is juxtaposed with the that of a terrorist and it exposes
the human bias behind the search engines. Ekstroms argument, however, focuses on the appeals
of logos.
Throughout his argument, Ekstrom explained many concepts to his audience. He uses
logos, or the logical appeal, to convince them. He began by creating a boundary between a
search engines capability of regurgitating facts versus knowledge, which is based on opinion. He
claims that the search engine bias can only be seen when searching for knowledge, not fact. This
is important because his two example searches, that of Obama and Breivik, are not factual, but
instead are more knowledge-based. He then proceeds to discuss the process used by search
engines to locate pictures. He explains how google uses picture captions and picture file names
that match the search query to display and find search results. This very fact was manipulated by
people to publish the demeaning photos of both Obama and Breivik. This information sets up
Ekstroms main argument. He argues that the bias lies in Google removing the search result of
Ekstrom speech analysis 5
Obamas monkey photo, while ignoring Breiviks photo. He tries to explain the bias behind
Googles intervention. Breivik is a terrorist who destroyed government buildings and killed
children. Ekstrom also mentions that Breivik actually killed eighty people in that process. This
statistic is primarily used to logically turn the audience against Breivik. By making his own
audience side against Breivik, Ekstrom effectively exposes their tendency to judge people. Since
the audience is now hostile against Breivik, they will agree with Googles lack of intervention
when it came to Breiviks search results. This is the moral bias Ekstrom was trying to uncover all
along.
In addition to Ekstroms use of ethos and logos, he successfully manipulates the audience
through his use of pathos, or emotional appeals. The aforementioned juxtaposition of the two
contrasting figures also serve to appeal to the audiences emotions. Obamas monkey photo is
likely to anger the audience. This anger will be satiated when Ekstrom reveals that the photo was
removed by Google. However, in the case of Breivik it is the opposite. After the audience is told
of Breiviks crimes, they will also be angry, but their anger will be satiated by the fact that the
photo was not taken down. It gives the audience a sense of justice knowing that Breivik was
represented by dog poop. This allows Ekstrom to identify the audiences feelings as the same
humanistic bias displayed by Google. He essentially puts the audience in the identical situation.
people. Through the use of parallel structure, he lists these common prejudices with the hope that
his audience will feel guilty. It is this feeling of guilt which inevitably pushes his audience to be
cognizant of their inherent biases, which are seen perforating through the digital world.
The culmination of these three rhetorical appeals make Ekstroms argument unbelievably
effective. His use and selection of Obama and Breivik were crucial in shaping the persuasion of
Ekstrom speech analysis 6
his speech. His language and delivery were also effective since he was able to clearly deliver his
message. Despite his success and flawless delivery, his argument was not representative of all
search engines. He attempted to prove and identify the moral bias held by search engines, but he
only used one example. He only presented two instances of search engine bias. He was wrong to
expect his audience to believe the moral bias of search engines, in general, because he has not
even considered other popular search engines available. He cannot rightfully expect his audience
to encourage the binding of the humanities and technology by only presenting two instances. His
argument would have been more globally applicable if he presented more than two situations.
Although he was not able to reach out to a global audience, his argument was more than enough
to convince his intended audience. He succeeds in identifying the humanistic bias that shines
References
Ekstrom, A. (2015, December 07). The Moral Bias Behind Your Search Results [Video file].
https://graneyandthepig.wordpress.com/2009/11/25/google-removes-michelle-obama-
monkey-picture/