Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer


Vol. 1 No. 1: June, 2013


February 22, 2016


The US American political machine has always been concerned with science and technology. This focus strengthened following World War II as the US government substantially increased funding and work force to support basic and applied research as a major means to compete with and defend against other nations. An army of people now exists within the federal government whose job is to maintain our scientific and technological superpower status. Borrowing from the notion of the rhetorical presidency, this paper discusses the rise of the techno-political presidency in American politics. More specifically, the analysis closely analyzes Truman‟s “Bombing of Hiroshima†speech, examines significant Presidential scientific and technological discourse since, and speculates upon the implications of such a focus for our political future. This case highlights an important, but neglected area of rhetorical study—significant enough to warrant attention as a rhetorical sub-genre.
Keywords: Presidential discourse, Rhetoric of technology, Political mythology, Genre, United States of America
“Like all mythology in a politically conscious age, the idea of an electrical utopia can be and is exploited by established institutions . . . . Technology finally serves the very military and industrial policies it was supposed to prevent†(Cary and Quirk, 1970).


  1. Bass, J., and Cherwitz, R. (1978). Imperial mission and manifest destiny: a case study of political myth in rhetorical discourse." Southern Speech Communication Journal, 43, 213-32.
  2. Bawarski, A. (2000). The genre function. College English, 62, 335-60.
  3. Bernanke, B. (2011). Promoting Research and Development. The Government‟s Role. Retrieved from
  4. Branscomb, L. (2013). From science policy to research policy. Retrieved from olicy.html
  5. Campbell, K. ,& Jamieson, K. (Eds.), (1976). Form and Genre: Shaping Rhetorical Action. Falls Church, VA: Speech Communication Association.
  6. Carey, J., & Quirk, J. (1970, Spring). The mythos of the electronic evolution. The American Scholar, p. 219-41.
  7. Ceaser, J., Thurow, G., Tulis, J., & Bessette, J. (1981, Spring). The rise of the rhetorical presidency. Presidential Studies Quarterly, 11, 158-171.
  8. Diaz, J. (2011, May 25). Why Kennedy's Moon speech was crazy—and how the US could have landed on the Moon with the Soviets. Retrieved from landed-on-the-moon-with-the-soviets
  9. Edelman, M. (1971). Politics as Symbolic Action. Chicago, IL: Markham Publishing Co.
  10. Ellul, J. (1964). The Technological Society (J. Wilkinson, Trans.). NY: Knopf.
  11. Eshbaugh-Soha, M. (2010). The Politics of Presidential Speeches. Congress and the Presidency, 37, 1-21.
  12. Ferrel, R. (1980). Off the Record: The
  13. Covenant Journal of Communication (CJOC) Vol. 1, No. 1 (Maiden Edition), July, 2013
  14. Private Papers of Harry S. Truman. NY: Harper and Row.
  15. Frobish, T. (2002, June). Neo-Luddite Rhetoric and Image Management. Peace Review, 14, 207 15.
  16. Furlani, C. (2001, June 26). Testimony of Cita M. Furlani, Director, National Coordination Office for IT R&D to Subcommittee on Research of the House Committee on Science. Retrieved from
  17. Gingrich, N. (1995). To Renew America. NY: Harper Collins.
  18. Gore, A. (1992). Earth in the Balance: Ecology and the Human Spirit. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
  19. Jamieson, K. H. (1973). Generic constraints and the rhetorical situation. Philosophy & Rhetoric, 6, 162-170.
  20. Marcuse, H. (1964). One-Dimensional Man. Boston: Beacon Press.
  21. Marvin, C. (1988). When Old Technologies were New: Thinking about Electric Communication in the Late Nineteenth Century. NY: Oxford University Press.
  22. Medhurst, M. (2004). Beyond the Rhetorical Presidency. College Station, TX: Texas A&M UP.
  23. Mueller, C. (1973). The Politics of Communication: A Study in the Political Sociology of Language Socialization and Legitimization. London: Oxford UP.
  24. Mumford, L. (1932). Technics and Civilization. Orlando, FL: Harcourt Brace & Company.
  25. Office of Science and Technology Policy. (1999, May 23). Retrieved from
  26. Peake, J., & Eshbaugh-Soha, M. (2008). The Agenda-Setting Impact of Major Presidential TV Addresses. Political Communication, 25, 113-137.
  27. Postman, N. (1993). Technopoly: The Surrender of Culture to Technology. NY: Vintage Books.
  28. Proposal Exponent. (2013, April 6). Federal R&D Funding: Quick Agency Profile. Retrieved from
  29. Public Papers of the Presidents of the United States: Harry S. Truman, Containing the Public Messages, Speeches and Statements of the President April 12 to December 21, 1945. (1961). Atomic Bombing of Hiroshima Announcement, Harry S. Truman, 1945. Washington D.C.: United States Government Printing Office.
  30. Rokeach, M. (1970). Beliefs, Attitudes and Values: A Theory of Organization and Change. San Francisco, CA: Josey-Bass Co.
  31. Sale, K. (1995). Rebels Against the Future: The Luddites and Their War on the Industrial Revolution: Lessons for the Computer Age. NY: Perseus Books.
  32. . Sargent, J., and Shea, D. (2012). The President‟s Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP): Issues for Congress. Congressional Research Service.
  33. Covenant Journal of Communication (CJOC) Vol. 1, No. 1 (Maiden Edition), July, 2013
  34. Retrieved from
  35. Smart Planet. (2013, April 6). United States will lead 2011 R&D funding, China now No. 2. Retrieved from
  36. The White House. (2013, April 7). Reaching our goals. Retrieved from
  37. The White House. (2013, April 7). Technology. Retrieved from
  38. Wiesner J., & York, H. (1964). Scientific American, 211, 27.
  39. Winner, L. (1989). The Whale and the Reactor: A Search for Limits in an Age of High Technology. Chicago: U of Chicago Press.
  40. Winner, L. (2004). Technology as Forms of Life. In Kaplan, D. (Ed.), Readings in the Philosophy of Technology. Oxford: Rowman & Littlefield.