Oral contention

[Vermilliona]

Do you think it's OK to have your contention 3/4 through your speech?

In my oral I'm arguing that Australia should stop facilitating the US' drone program, and so far I'm structuring so that the first 3/4 are about how inefficient/inaccurate/bullshit the program is (without mentioning Australia's role) and then after they've heard all of this I tell them that Australia has a key role in the program and go on about the need for an inquiry and etc. I think it might give it a bit more surprise factor, because it's easy to hear how the US is irresponsible, but then it kind of gives you a start when you realise how we're the same, idk (or is it a bit obvious?)

So my question is as above, do you think it's alright if my actual specialised contention is towards the end of the speech?

Thanks in advance

[vox nihili]

Do you think it's OK to have your contention 3/4 through your speech?

In my oral I'm arguing that Australia should stop facilitating the US' drone program, and so far I'm structuring so that the first 3/4 are about how inefficient/inaccurate/bullshit the program is (without mentioning Australia's role) and then after they've heard all of this I tell them that Australia has a key role in the program and go on about the need for an inquiry and etc. I think it might give it a bit more surprise factor, because it's easy to hear how the US is irresponsible, but then it kind of gives you a start when you realise how we're the same, idk (or is it a bit obvious?)

So my question is as above, do you think it's alright if my actual specialised contention is towards the end of the speech?

Thanks in advance

Sounds great to me. Maybe not 3/4 through though. The approach you've got is fine, but you need to make the majority of the speech about Australia's involvement. So maybe spend a while talking about how the American programme sucks, but just make sure you've got time to talk about Australia's role as well. That will also help with your surprise factor! If you bury it too deep in the speech, people will get confused and bored. But great idea, I like it!

[qqla]

Sounds splendid.

I reckon an audience doesn't really go 'digging' for your contention in a speech. Instead, after the speech, they try and evaluate about how powerful or effective you were in your attempt to convince them through your respective ideas and beliefs. That's what gets people talking after a good speech, they simply go 'wow that was a damn good talk' or something.

If you're effective in delivery, then you won't have to worry about explicitly dropping your 'contention' in at all!