"PragerU as Genre: How Ideologies Typify Speech"

Download PDF

About the Author

Christopher Luis Shosted  is a student at Moravian College in Bethlehem, PA. He will graduate in May of 2020 with a B.A. in English and a certification in writing arts. Since enrolling at Moravian College in 2018, Christopher has focused on understanding the drives behind rhetorics that harm marginalized groups. He plans to continue his education through a Master’s and Ph.D program where he wishes to put rhetorical theory in conversation with literary studies.

Contents

Introduction

Theories on Genre

PragerU’s Videos

Comparing PragerU to Academic Discourse

PragerU and Post-Truth

Conclusion

References

Conclusion

Using genre to understand ideological trends is useful because through observing the typification of speech, the core values of those who engage with that genre are revealed. In this case, the genre of PragerU’s videos shows a habitual manipulation of facts to suit a particular narrative. This genre system is one of many operating under the terms of a Faustian bargain whereby authority is gained in exchange for the breeding of mistrust toward all rhetorical action. PragerU is rhetoric distilled to its basest form where persuasion is the only goal regardless of the cost.

PragerU’s videos are a genre by virtue of their response to an exigence, but it is through their generic mimicry that they cross into the realm of the unethical. PragerU is an example of why a genre is more than its features, because despite its branding, its style, and the social standing of its speakers, it is still far removed from the academic form it brandishes. Rather, it is an offshoot of the troubling trend of post-truth rhetoric that pollutes discourse. Actual universities do not run counter to PragerU’s ideology because they are bastions of post-modern, neo-Marxist, narcissistic fools, but because the ideologies promoted by PragerU are actively harmful to modern life.

The ideology of PragerU is a terrifying one that frames the world into wars of opposing ideas where cheap tricks and dirty tactics are de rigueur. The irony is that the very issues PragerU’s speakers condemn are the very same actions they themselves commit. Jordan Peterson is quick to point out post-modernist ideological application by professors but ignores his fellow speakers’ application of PragerU’s ideology to every facet of modern life through their extensive catalogue of videos on politics, history, literature, economics, science, theology, public policy, race, and sex and gender. Heather Mac Donald takes umbrage with the notion that professors could limit exposure to the literary canon, but the study guide accompanying her video intentionally hides opposing viewpoints and demonize those who disagree with her. And George Will chastises federal student aid for being the government meddling where it doesn’t belong but does not mention PragerU’s tax status as a charitable organization to help underwrite the $50,000 cost of their weekly videos. Hypocrisy is the trademark of the charlatan and PragerU is no different. Like all post-truth rhetoric, their claims fail to withstand the slightest amount of scrutiny, and in the words of Jordan Peterson, deserve to be “consigned to the dustbin of history.”