The truth does not always persuade because the audience is not always accepting of the truth.  Some audiences may be so rooted in their ways that they refuse to see from another point of view.  Unlike dialectic, which focuses on the discovery of conviction and belief, rhetoric emphasizes persuasion.  In earlier class discussions, we talked about how rhetoric can be used for good and for evil depending on who uses it.  Gorgias brought to light that Sophists, like himself, use rhetoric as a means of power (which is wrong).  Socrates emphasized the need for justice and knowledge of the topic in which a rhetor was speaking about.  Plato agrees with Socrates and thinks only those who are experts in their craft should persuade the public, not people who are only skilled in public speaking.

Aristotle says that the truth does not always persuade and I think that he means the truth can sometimes be dull.  Speaking about the truth is comparable to teaching because the orator is telling the audience the difference between right and wrong.  As we see in the media today, the truth is not always the most persuasive argument because it is not the most interesting.  Journalists and reporters try to “sell” a story and gather the largest fan base, or following, for their news station.  They pick and choose topics, comments, video footage, and pictures that best fit the story they would like to tell.  Without knowledge of the actual truth, the public will be easily persuaded by the news station.  Aristotle in Book One says, “…rhetoric is useful, [first] because the true and the just are by nature stronger than their opposites…” so if the public already knew the true story, they would be much less likely to believe the biased news report.  Although the truth is not always persuasive, it is the most important aspect of a story.  The truth will overpower deception as long as the audience isn’t distracted by the presentation of deception.