how to do a good whip speech

How to give great whip speeches

Hey there! Just a reminder: this is not a Buildacase course lesson. These articles primarily cover debate theory which are not necessary or super helpful to novices, who need more practical instructions. If you are new and want to improve at debating, I suggest starting with Lesson One .

Here are some ridiculous whip myths I have heard during my five years debating for Hart House (taught by the pros, mind you!). “ I should summarize the content brought by all the teams in the round.” “Whip speeches must be sorted by themes.” “I should not add any new content in a whip speech.” Let’s go through each of these myths and explain how to construct a persuasive whip speech.

Content in Whips

Different debaters have two vastly different problems with whip speeches: no content, or too much content. We will start with the first problem: not enough content. 

Avoiding adding new content and only summarizing your extension is the fastest way to get low speaks and lose debate rounds. The judges have already tracked your partner’s speech, they do not need repetition. Instead, they need new reasons why you are winning. To that end, whips are the best place to add in content that wins you the round. 

• There is little opportunity for other teams to respond, so you can sound authoritative. 
• You speak near the end of the debate, so the judges are zoned in and have your speech fresh in their minds as they deliberate. 
• Since you speak at the end of the debate, you can strategically reposition your teammate’s extension to win, even if it wasn’t explained properly in extension.

Yes, you cannot explicitly add certain forms of content. You cannot run a brand new argument that is not rooted in your extension’s case. You cannot add a new, unique mechanism that is distinct from your extension’s. 

But here is what you can do to add in new content in your speech:

• Weighing: why your mechanism is better than your fronthalfs, why your impact is more important than other teams’.
• Mitigation and refutation of all other teams in the round

That much is obvious, but how do you do this discreetly without adding too much new stuff? You use language that grounds it in your partner’s extension.

• How to sell it: “this is context that an average reasonable voter should know, this is context that is assumed by the infoslide/other team/motion, this is refutation to other bench, this is mitigation proving why we are more important than our fronthalf”
• Requirements: your partner needs to have a case/mech/impact that is relevant to the new context, OR other teams need to have case/mech/impact that has been a main clash throughout the round
• Common error: Not explaining the implication of your context to the judge.

Examples: WIP

• Weigh on multiple metrics, add ‘second-degree’ impacts, add new impacts that are tangential to the main impact but still a result of the mechanism
• How to sell it: “my partner mentioned some obvious good impacts, but here are the more unlikely impacts which are very important…” “there are additional impacts on top of the ones my partner mentioned” “there are several reasons why my partner’s impact is the most important…”)
• You can learn more about metrics and how to weigh in this lesson .
• Requirements: your partner needs to have a case/mech/impact that is relevant to the new impacts/weighing
• Common error: weighing/impacts being too far removed from your partner’s case, so the judge does not credit you. Ask yourself: will a judge be certain that my whip is directly connected to my partner when they first hear the speech?
• Requirements: (1) identify a mechanism and impact that your opponent has claimed, (2) show why their outcome is actually a benefit for your side or a serious harm for their side, (3) weigh why that benefit/harm is more important than other arguments in the round.

The tl;dr is: there are many different strategies to add high-quality, convincing content to your whips. Once you realize this, you will almost always have too much to say during whips. Now, how do you organize all this content?

Organizing a Whip

The second problem is having too much content or having empty content. Typically, debaters encounter this problem if they have spent too much time writing down/tracking content in the round, and not enough time actually thinking about the content. 

There are a few strategies that you can employ while listening to speeches before your whip speech:

A) Organizing arguments into ‘clashes’ and deciding how to address the clash.

• Notice how this has two parts: Why they are unimportant, and why your extension is important.
• Notice this can have 4+ parts: refuting/mitigating each argument, and building your extension
• You must have good reasons why the clash you ARE spending time on is important

B) Deciding on a goal and building the whip speech around that goal

You don’t have enough time to do everything in a whip. Instead, you have to trust yourself to make the correct decision about time allocation. Personally, all my best speeches are speeches with very specific, granular goals. There can be a few goals: 

• Rebuild the extension to address refutation or a critical flaw 
• Weigh your impact (on one or more metrics) or your metric
• Refute your opponents
• Weigh/mitigate your fronthalf
• Explaining the implications of your analysis on how the judge should adjudicate the round***
• Address confusion/clarify the clashes and what other teams said in order to do the other four things above

It is very rare that you have to do everything on this list in a debate round. Usually, you have to do just 2-3, or you can spend 1 minute on a few of them and then 4-5 minutes on one main one. The important thing is to rank your goals and spend sufficient time addressing the highest priority goals, and then reflecting after the round if that was indeed the correct strategy. The second most important thing is to always explain the implications of your analysis (all your refutation, your weighing, etc.) on how the judges should adjudicate the round.

C) Write less of what everyone else is saying, write more of what you are going to say, and don’t spend too much time on the low-hanging fruit

The important part of every teams’ argument can be summarized into one to three sentences. As such, you should not be writing an essay on each of your opponent’s arguments. Instead, practice capturing an argument in a short blurb that you can draw upon to refute later.

• Claim, context, mech, impact, weighing -> your refutation
• If you want to learn more about refutation and argument structure, check out Lessons ().

As a whip, you have almost 60 minutes to think of a solution to the motion that the other speakers only had 15-30 minutes to solve. The vast majority of thinking during the round should be about how to win on the harder arguments. As such, if the PM says an argument that is obviously flawed, you should not spend the whole round thinking of 35 different ways to refute that one argument. 

Leave the obvious stuff alone — someone else will probably deal with it before you and render all your refutation useless. If they don’t then you can deal with it easily anyways! Instead, focus on difficult questions, like how you will weigh your partners’ extension, or if you can see any obvious holes in the extension as you created it during prep.

D) Critically assess if what you wrote is worth saying

In strong rooms you will often find some of your speech is said by other speakers, or it becomes useless because of how the debate ends up moving organically, or your partner explains enough that it is no longer necessary to also say it. In these situations, good whips will throw away the redundant parts of their speeches and come up with something new EVEN if it means coming up with something panicked 5 minutes before you speak. 

Luckily, this problem can be avoided with practice. The past sections of this article have already covered how to generate new content AND come up with a strategic plan for your speech early into the round. Put the information to good use!

• Speak in a debate round.

Here’s the thing with practicing whips… It is painful because you really have to watch / debate in a whole round. After 50 minutes of listening to other debaters, you can feel incredibly overwhelmed. If you give a poor speech after 50 minutes, it can be really demotivating for practicing whip speeches going forward. However, there really isn’t a way around it, because whip speeches are unique.

You can try listening to fronthalfs and giving a DLO speech to practice whips more efficiently. But it will not substitute perfectly for whips, because whips have to juggle a lot more content, often run a lot less refutation, and have more time to think strategically.

Therefore, I’m suggesting for the first and ONLY time ever to practice by doing a full debate round. However, to be efficient, I highly recommend focusing on ONE part of a whip speech over a few practice sessions. Do three debate rounds over 2-3 days, but particularly focus on assembling arguments into themes and weighing the themes. Or focus on rebuilding your partners’ argument. Yes, sometimes the round will not call for that skill, depending on the motion and how the debate goes. In those cases, feel free to be flexible, but do not try to do it all! Above all, be kind to yourself, because whips take a long time to become good at!

Judging at a tournament is a very intense and efficient way to expose yourself to many different debate motions, debate speaking styles, and understand what makes an argument persuasive to judges. If you judge, make sure to ask yourself: how could the whip speaker have won that round for their team, what did they miss, or what did the whip speaker do that won the round? As a whip, your primarily goal is to sell your partners’ extension based on what happened in the round. Therefore, judging and critically assessing backhalf teams is a great way to get into the habit of thinking strategically

3. Watch and get inspired

In my opinion, whip speakers are the most entertaining speakers to watch. I personally love whip speeches. They. are my favourite speech, because I feel like I am channeling my favourite debaters’ cool energy when I give a good whip speech. Here are some of my favourite whips: (Obviously this is not a comprehensive list please do not get upset that I did not put your personal favourite on this short list):

Astana EUDC 2020 | Open Quarterfinals | Room 1 Astana – YouTube – CO whip

Oxford Online IV 2020 Open Final – YouTube – CO whip

Warsaw EUDC 2016 – Open Semis [Channel 1] – YouTube – CO whip

Share this:

Leave a comment cancel reply.

Create a website or blog at WordPress.com

• Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
• Subscribe Subscribed
• Copy shortlink
• Report this content
• View post in Reader
• Manage subscriptions
• Collapse this bar

Lesson 7.4: Asian Parliamentary Format - Whip Speakers

Asian Parliamentary Format - Whip Speakers

Brief Notes on this Lecture

Whip speakers are the last constructive speakers in the Asian Parliamentary format. Constructive speakers are those who build up arguments and clash points in the debate. Although whip speakers don't usually present new arguments (the Opposition Whip speaker is forbidden from doing this and it's too late in the debate for any new arguments to make a huge impact anyway) they can present new rebuttals, examples, analysis and defense of arguments that have already been made. They do this by doing the following

A) Briefly summarize and defend your case

· It's important at the start of the speech to spend a minute or less to emphasize the points made by your team. This reminds the audience what the contribution of your team is and gives you a context from which to make your rebutalls and analysis. It will be easier to compare the other team's arguments to yours if you briefly summarize them first.

B) Summarize and prioritize the most important arguments or issues in the debate.

· There will be many arguments and rebuttals flying around in the debate. You need to identify the main themes or major arguments that are dominating the debate or that you feel are important. This part is really important, you cannot talk about everything that has been said so you will have to choose. Choosing ideas that are not important will make the rest of your speech redundant. Be objective when deciding what the clash points are and be fair to the other team.

C) Rebut and analyze the arguments or issues and say why your team has done better on all of them, most of them or on the most important ones

· This is the largest part of your speech. Once you have identified the major issues, go through and rebut all of them. Compare them to arguments your team has made and show why yours are better.

Don't present new arguments, but you can present new analysis, new examples, new rebuttals and give support for arguments that your teammates have already made in the debate

Watch a lecture video

Transcript of Lecture Speech

Hello hello, welcome back! It's time to talk about the 3rd speakers on both teams. And I'm also going to talk about these two guys, or girls together because their roles are very similar to each other. There are some differences, but they are very similar. So I'm gong to talk about the Government Whip (GW) and the Opposition Whip (OW) collectively.

It's important to realize (as whip) you are coming at the end of the debate, so at this part of the debate, 4 speakers or 5 speakers if you are opposition whip, would have already spoken before you. There are going to be many arguments and rebuttals and claims and counter claims and accusations and examples and analysis and all these different things. So your job in principle is to sort out this mess, is to balance these things and to tell the judges and the teams, why you have done better. More than tell them, show them why you have done better.

There are essentially 3 parts to your speech. Firstly, as a good whip you must briefly summarize and defend your case Secondly summarize and prioritize the issues and ideas in the debate, and then thirdly, analyze and rebut these issues. Let's look at them.

Firstly briefly summarize your case and your position. This helps give the judges or the audience a little bit of clarity. When you get up (to make your speech), this is the first thing (you should do) and you shouldn't take very long. If you are speaking for 7 minutes, this should be about a minute or less. You (can) say "now this is what we have done, these are our 3 arguments (or) these are our 4 arguments and these arguments are still strong and still doing well". You are giving them a brief overview of what your team has presented in this debate.

The second thing you do and this is one of the most important things, you summarize and prioritize the issues and ideas in the debate. You identifying what you think are the most important points in the debate. These are things that maybe will be questions in the minds of the audience. Things on which the debate might turn, might hinge. For example on the topic that we would ban smoking in the university campus, one of the issues may be how much harm is there from people smoking on campus. Is the harm very very real? (This is) Because the government team will try to create a lot of harm to a lot of people and the opposition team will try to reduce this harm, and say that it's really not that much harm. Or an issue could be about rights - how do we balance the rights of smokers and the rights of non-smokers? So as a whip speaker, I want to identify these things. I want to say, or you want to say, there are two issues in this debate, or there are 3 issues in the debate. Firstly the issue of harm, secondly the issue of rights, and thirdly what is the role of a university. Sometimes these can be characterized based on the arguments of the other team. Perhaps the 3 arguments they have presented, those are going to be the important issues in the debate.

Sometimes these (issues) are also presented as questions. Do people have the right to smoke? Or which is more important? And so on and so forth - you get the idea. Basically what you have to do is identify what the most important issues in the debate are. This should also not take very long.

The third thing you should do is you should rebut and analyze those issues. Now (for example) "I've identified 3 important issues, I've said the first important issue in this debate is what is the harm of second hand smoke, secondly how do we balance the rights of smokers and non-smokers (and thirdly what is the role of universities)...and in the 3rd part of my speech i should rebut and analyze those things. So since I said what is harm, I will give you reasons why the harm is very real or the harm can be reduced..", and then secondly when I talk about the rights, I will show you why our argumentation on rights is better than their argumentation of rights.

To do these things I can provide new rebuttals to arguments, I can provide new examples, I can also provide new analysis to rebuttals. What i cannot do, what I should not do as a whip speaker is provide new arguments. A new argument is an idea that has not happened in the debate before and is not a rebuttal. So if no one on my team so far has talked about, let's say cost, the economic perspective has never come up in this debate before. Then as the whip speaker I shouldn't bring that idea up. The rules of Asian Parliamentary technically allow the government whip (to bring new arguments) but specifically forbid the opposition whip from doing this. But I think it's good strategy for neither of the whip speakers to bring new arguments. You can bring a new rebuttal, so if you want to rebut the second speakers speech and third speakers speech by providing economic analysis, you can do that. A lot of it is how you make your points.

To recap, the whip speaker speaks at the end, so your job is to summarize and to clarify issues, to attract points that are still hanging, to show why your team is doing better. To that effect you should do three things; start by providing a brief summary of the arguments of your team and your case, and defend them. Then prioritize and analyze the issues of the debate - identify which you think are the most important issues in this debate. Thirdly - and this will be the bulk of your speech, analyze and rebut those issues. Tell the audience and the judges why your team did better, why the position of your team is much better for those issues, and rebut and analyze. Remember, no new arguments, but new examples and new rebuttals are okay

Good luck whip!

Here Here's Ye Eun

Home to the various wonders that fill the silence in my life

A Lesson into Debating: The Whip

A “Whip” is a position found in parliamentary style debate, and is one of the more difficult positions to master. As the 3rd out of 4 speakers found within the positions, they are one of the last to speak and can create some of the biggest impacts during debate.

So far throughout my debating career, the Whip position has been one of my personal favorites to do and it is one that I specialize in quite a bit. I gave a lecture on Whipping during one of the HYDS club sessions and wanted to share that knowledge and discussion here to perhaps showcase this position to the world.

This spring semester, the Korean debate circle is using the Asian Parliamentary style of debating, so I’ll be focusing on what Whipping means under that style specifically!

What Exactly is a “Whip”?

The basic job of the Whip is to basically give a biased summary of the debate explaining why their side won. With rebuttals, you can basically dismantle the opponents argument and explain to the judge why your arguments matter more. Your job is to basically put a nice little ribbon on the present that is your case.

You have to take notes of all the key points each speaker talks about in their speeches, and often times even I myself end up walking to the podium with like 4 papers worth of back to back notes. If you like note-taking, organizing, and analyzing then this position would definitely suit your interests.

When whipping, a good few questions to answer throughout your speech would be “why is our case more likely”, “why is our case more important”, and finally, “why is our case more relevant to the motion”.

How Do You Whip?

When looking at the structure of a very basic AP (Asian Parliamentary) Whip speech, you’d follow as the picture above states. You’d start with a short introduction sign-posting your order of speech. “I will be talking about X, Y, Z” for example.

Then you’d go on to rebut the case of your opposition by giving examples on why they’re wrong! This can confuse a lot of new debaters because you’re not allowed to talk about things that haven’t been brought up by your first and second speaker. Using their argument as basis, you just argue with and dismantle the other side.

Then you’d go into something calling “weighing”. Weighing is basically the action in which you prove why your case is more important. When comparing apples to oranges, you have to create a metric to decide which one is the superior fruit. If it’s based on sweetness then the apple is clearly more favorable, but if we’re looking at complexity of flavor then the orange clearly triumphs. This perspective is important in Whip speeches as it can make or break your teams arguments! Weighing can be really difficult for new debaters, but you just need to remember that you’re basically explaining your metric for what a win needs, and why your team fits that metric better.

Finally, clash analysis!

What On Earth is a Clash?

Clash analysis is something incredibly unique to AP style of debating, as other parliamentary styles don’t prioritize clashes as much as AP does. A clash focuses a lot on the key points of engagement that happened in the debate. The things both sides argued the most on tend to determine the clash that takes place.

Going back to apples and oranges, if both teams were arguing for which fruit was better, and the argument from team 1 was that “apples are easier to eat” while team 2 says “oranges taste better” then the clash would be upon “Convenience vs Taste”.

Analyzing these clashes are a really improtant job for Whips as you basically decide which side made more sense and deserve to be the winner. It’s a general justification to show that your argument made more sense. So in the previous example, you’d perhaps make the argument that team apples wins the clash since “convenience means people are eating more often, meaning that they’d be getting more out of apples in their lives than oranges”, or something like that.

This justification proves to the judge that you’re argument triumphs over the other one, and often times good clash analysis and weighing can pretty much win a stalemate debate!

Being A Good Whip.

Honestly, there isn’t really a one size fits all method for Whipping. The explanations I gave above can help people find their foothold into the Whip position, but what someone chooses to do after that is entirely up to them! A good Whip cannot exactly be trained by a format. You just learn as you go.

Whipping is such a unique position in debate that every Whip has their own unique style of Whipping. Maybe someone focuses more on clash analysis, maybe someone is more aggressive with their weighing, maybe someone chooses to focus on rebuttals. All of these are different ways one can actually choose to format their style around.

This is all stuff I learnt over my few months of being in the debate community, and even then I am still learning new skills and techniques every time!

So, don’t worry too much about being good or bad at something, and instead, I urge you all to pursue the search of the new and just try something that’s been intimidating you to do. Whipping is a frightening position for most, but maybe after reading this you’ll find that it sounds a lot less scary than it used to.

Whipping is just a really fun, but difficult, part of debate! I wanted to show you all a glimpse into what it’s like, and what skills one might need to know to properly be able to Whip in the Asian Parliamentary Debate format.

If you want to learn more about Asian Parliamentary debating, HYDS has an AP workbook that I will be linking here from our debate resources for anyone interested!

I guess I would then toss over the questions to you all.

Would you ever want to try Whipping in a debate?

Share this:

Published by yen kang.

21 Years Old. Just here to talk about my experience with Korean Debate! Vice President to the Hanyang Debate Society. View more posts

4 thoughts on “ A Lesson into Debating: The Whip ”

That’s too much information for me. I’m not a good speaker. What do I do to get my mind told in a way that’s in my head?

Honestly, it’s really just a matter of practice. You just need to push yourself to talk more and practice speaking more. It’s definitely not easy trying to articulate your thoughts properly.

hey! really interesting topics and strategies. I feel like I Ould use it not only in debates but in daily life. Anyways, I have a question. I often hear about cross examination debate type, do these strategies can be applied there too?

But yes, absolutely! The strategies I talk about here are applicable in most types of debate. Skills used for the Whip are pretty much applicable all around ^^

Like Liked by 1 person

Leave a comment Cancel reply

• Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
• Subscribe Subscribed
• Copy shortlink
• Report this content
• View post in Reader
• Manage subscriptions
• Collapse this bar

• PRO Courses Guides New Tech Help Pro Expert Videos About wikiHow Pro Upgrade Sign In
• EDIT Edit this Article
• EXPLORE Tech Help Pro About Us Random Article Quizzes Request a New Article Community Dashboard This Or That Game Popular Categories Arts and Entertainment Artwork Books Movies Computers and Electronics Computers Phone Skills Technology Hacks Health Men's Health Mental Health Women's Health Relationships Dating Love Relationship Issues Hobbies and Crafts Crafts Drawing Games Education & Communication Communication Skills Personal Development Studying Personal Care and Style Fashion Hair Care Personal Hygiene Youth Personal Care School Stuff Dating All Categories Arts and Entertainment Finance and Business Home and Garden Relationship Quizzes Cars & Other Vehicles Food and Entertaining Personal Care and Style Sports and Fitness Computers and Electronics Health Pets and Animals Travel Education & Communication Hobbies and Crafts Philosophy and Religion Work World Family Life Holidays and Traditions Relationships Youth
• Browse Articles
• Learn Something New
• Quizzes Hot
• Happiness Hub
• This Or That Game
• Train Your Brain
• Explore More
• Support wikiHow
• About wikiHow
• Log in / Sign up
• Education and Communications
• Communication Skills
• Public Speaking

How to Perform Well in a Debate

Last Updated: June 24, 2024 Fact Checked

Expert Q&A

This article was co-authored by Lynn Kirkham . Lynn Kirkham is a Professional Public Speaker and Founder of Yes You Can Speak, a San Francisco Bay Area-based public speaking educational business empowering thousands of professionals to take command of whatever stage they've been given - from job interviews, boardroom talks to TEDx and large conference platforms. Lynn was chosen as the official TEDx Berkeley speaker coach for the last four years and has worked with executives at Google, Facebook, Intuit, Genentech, Intel, VMware, and others. There are 7 references cited in this article, which can be found at the bottom of the page. This article has been fact-checked, ensuring the accuracy of any cited facts and confirming the authority of its sources. This article has been viewed 1,036,042 times.

People may come up with the most stunning content for their argument, but the fact is that in most cases, nearly one-third of the marking criteria goes to your delivery of the material. While speaking passionately about poorly researched work probably won't win you a debate, marrying factual evidence with emotional conviction will. No matter how analytical and academic a debate is, your presentation will have a definite effect on your adjudicator, as well as your audience. In a tight match, your win may rest on the drama of your performance.

• You'll need to have an understanding of your audience's desires and needs, as well as how to best appeal to them.
• When appealing to your audience, think about a balance of logos, ethos, and pathos. [2] X Research source These three modes of persuasion will be used to convince your audience to believe in your argument. Each will provoke a different reaction from a crowd, and you must change your approach to adapt to the needs of your audience.
• A more logical approach, resting mainly on logos, might be appropriate when your audience wants factual evidence of how you'll improve their dire circumstances.
• When trying to keep an even tone and seem unbiased, employ more ethos in your speech. This is good for a more formal audience, but one that you still need to empathize with you, or the situation that you're being faced with.
• Pathos has the potential to become manipulative in the wrong occasion, but when done right, you can inspire particular strong emotions within your audience. These emotions have the power to drastically change the course of your speech.
• Mastering the art of rhetoric will ensure that your prepared speech is as strong as possible. This will booster your ability to perform this argument.

• Introduction. Express your message and why it's important to your audience, as well as yourself.
• Statement of fact. Break down the general thesis of your argument into smaller parts. This is where you name reasons why the current issue exists.
• Confirmation, or proof. Craft your main argument here, as well as reasons why your argument is a successful one.
• Refutation. Acknowledge your opposition, giving some credence to their argument, before challenging their point-of-view.
• Conclusion. Wrap up your main points of your argument and give instructions on what you want your audience to do or think.

• You should also adjust your style to fit your audience. Make sure you express your ideas in a way that aligns with the moral and intellectual level of your audience.
• You can make active use of various linguistic tropes when arranging your arguments. Also known as "figures of speech," these tropes are tried and true methods in composing a sleek and compelling argument.
• Antithesis will help you contrast ideas and phrases, as will skillful juxtaposition. Metaphor and simile are both nice ways to equate one idea to another. Any of these tropes will add spice to your writing.

• It's worth noting that certain aspects of your debate will have to be performed on the fly. By memorizing the facts of your topic, however, you'll be able to recount these facts organically. This will help you grow more confident in improvising your speech.

• Delivery will also vary to fit your audience. When speaking to a smaller audience, you can make more eye contact, speak more directly to those listening to you. Franklin Delano Roosevelt's "Fireside Chats," for example, were radio broadcasts intended to feel intimate for everyone listening in. His larger speeches, in contrast, felt more immediate and righteous, fitting the more massive scope of their subject matter.

• The "uh" sound usually takes less time to overcome in speech. It suggests that you've just finished one point, and you're taking a moment to move onto the next.
• Your "um" sounds can be far more dangerous, as they suggest that you may be searching for completely unfamiliar information. You'll want to eliminate both from your speech patterns in formal debate, however, as both suggest a stalling in your thought process.
• Try replacing your filler sounds with silence. This will give your audience time to stew on your last point, and it will also give you time to generate your stimulus for your next idea.
• Remember that everyone needs time to process before moving to their next sentence. You aren't eliminating this thought process. You are, however, making it appear that you are thinking less than you actually are.

• When your work is highly researched, it runs the risk of becoming pedantic. If you're simply regurgitating facts from academia, your rhetoric can quickly become dull and overly intellectual. Look out for words such as "capitalist" or "dichotomy." These sorts of words, while thick with various meanings, have been dulled by overuse in the past few years.

• It's much easier to enunciate if you slow down the pace of your speech. You may be able to get through a larger quantity of points, but it's unlikely that all of them will be heard.
• Try the "pencil-in-mouth" drill if you want to improve your articulation. Stick a pencil in your mouth, parallel to your forehead, and practice your speech while holding it in place. You'll have to verbalize around this obstacle in your mouth, working harder to enunciate your syllables.
• When you remove the pencil, you'll find that your speech is far clearer. Keep that same level of enunciation when you're performing. When you blend enunciation with a slower manner of speech, it'll be easier for others to dissect your points.

• Boil your arguments into more specific points, mentally, before launching in. You won't win this portion of your debate by scattering new ideas into the air at the last moment.
• Sum up your argument into one or two sentences. You'll obviously be extrapolating on these points, but it'll help you to have a logical home base to return to.
• Focus on what you know you've done successfully. Don't be hard on yourself for taking the "path of least resistance" when going for the win.

• You generally have a large stage to inhabit while debating. Occupy this space fully. You don't want to be pacing nervously, but you do want to ensure that you look comfortable speaking in front of others.
• Don't rely on gesture as a nervous tick. If you're releasing anxiety through gesture, then your gestures will not be strong. Instead, they'll add unnecessary motion, distracting from your speech.

• After you make eye contact with one person in the audience, deliver your next line or phrase to the next person. This way, you'll connect with a larger number of people in a one-on-one way.
• You can also use eye contact to silence a distracting presence in your audience. If someone isn't paying attention to you, then a prolonged stare will make them feel uncomfortable. The hope, then, is that they'll quiet down, or at least attempt to be less distracting.

• If you're speaking about grisly, violent details, you'll want to adapt a tone of disgust. When slipping in a mild joke or self-aware remark, a humorous or light-hearted tone can be very effective.
• Above all, your tone should always have some level of urgency. This proves that you aren't avoiding the importance of the topic at hand. Diversifying your tone is very important, but you never want to forget the core of your speech.

• When done poorly, these major pauses can really tank an argument. Make sure that you've built up to this pause with a great deal of momentum. That way, your silence will be earned.
• Pauses can range in their use, from dividing major points in a paragraph to allowing you to get a drink of water. Make sure that you're losing your pauses appropriately, as you don't want to break your focus with too much regularity.

• Often referred to as a "final blast," your closing remark takes familiar points from your speech and amplifies them with a final appeal to your audience.
• You can achieve this with a heightened tone of voice, or you can allow your speech to move a bit quicker than it normally would. Poking small holes in your composure will amplify your power as an orator, and this last effort may be crucial in solidifying a win.

Reader Videos

• Don't be afraid if you just said something wrong. Clarify it while keeping calm. Being confident at all turns is key. Confidence can lead you anywhere. Thanks Helpful 5 Not Helpful 0
• Just remember that the content and accuracy of your argument will still be what the adjudicator will be marking primarily upon. You want to perform well and naturally, but you don't want to invent. Thanks Helpful 5 Not Helpful 0
• Make your arguments more convincing with eye contact, strong body posture, pauses, a sense of certainty in your speech, clearness, and conciseness. Thanks Helpful 0 Not Helpful 0

Tips from our Readers

• If you forget your point, simply make something relevant up on the fly to cover the hesitation. Hesitating can give the other side an edge.
• Use examples, illustrations, and gestures to explain your arguments vividly. It engages the audience more than plain speech.
• Don't be nervous — take deep breaths and picture something calming like puppies cuddling. Stay confident.
• Speak naturally and avoid artificial-sounding tone changes. Sincerity makes you more persuasive.
• Keep calm eye contact with the judges and audience. It shows you're focused and self-assured.
• Stick to the issue at hand. Don't drift or you'll weaken your argument. Stay concise.

You Might Also Like

• ↑ https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/215588515.pdf
• ↑ https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/dreaming-freud/201705/six-ways-appeal-audience
• ↑ https://www.unr.edu/writing-speaking-center/student-resources/writing-speaking-resources/speech-delivery
• ↑ https://hbr.org/2018/08/how-to-stop-saying-um-ah-and-you-know
• ↑ https://writingcenter.unc.edu/tips-and-tools/word-choice/
• ↑ https://debate.uvm.edu/NFL/rostrumlib/cxCheshier0402.pdf
• ↑ https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/beautiful-minds/review-of-grit-the-power-of-passion-and-perseverance/

About This Article

To perform well in a debate, speak slowly and enunciate your words so your audience has more time to process all of the points you're making. You should also try to vary the tone of your voice while you’re speaking, which will make your speech more interesting and engaging. For example, if you're talking about a shocking statistic, use a tone of surprise to help get your point across. Additionally, maintain good eye contact with your audience and your adjudicator throughout the debate so they feel like you're speaking directly to them. When you're ready to end your debate, heighten your tone of voice and speak a little bit faster for your closing arguments to show that you're passionate about the topic. For more tips, like how to come up with a persuasive argument, keep reading! Did this summary help you? Yes No

• Send fan mail to authors

Reader Success Stories

Nicholas Untun

May 22, 2017

Did this article help you?

Shruthi Karanam

Nov 26, 2016

Nov 7, 2017

Paula Omiat

Jul 2, 2020

Jul 1, 2017

Featured Articles

Trending Articles

Watch Articles

• Terms of Use
• Privacy Policy
• Do Not Sell or Share My Info
• Not Selling Info

Get all the best how-tos!

Sign up for wikiHow's weekly email newsletter

The public speaking workshop part 3: How to write a whip-smart speech

In the third part of our public speaking workshop (Part 1 was ‘ Getting your mindset right ‘ and Part 2 was Pro Tips for Knockout Speech ) we’ve asked the experts for all of the tips, tricks and teachings you need for a writing a speech or presentation.

You’re due to give a speech, whether at a wedding, work meeting or Zoom conference, and as if your pre-public speaking nerves weren’t enough you’re sat in front of a blank doc with writer’s block. Sound familiar?

It may be reassuring to know that the world’s most articulate wordsmiths can struggle with this exact same keyboard paralysis when it comes to putting a speech down on paper. Speaking aloud has a different rhythm to reading words on a page and it can be all too easy to lose your audience by way of meandering anecdotes, knotty language or complicated graphs and tables that distract from the point that you’re trying to put across (making no mention of recent PowerPoint fails at UK government press briefings).

Delivering an Obama (or Kamala) level speech may indeed be an art and there’s a reason why public speakers often hire a crack team of speechwriters to spin their initial ideas and concepts into public speaking gold. Luckily you don’t need to enlist a scribe to craft a speech that’s memorable for all of the right reasons – learn the surprisingly simple speech writing secrets of those in the know and you’ll have your audience eating out of the palm of your hand. Or at the very least, listening, which really isn’t something to be taken for granted according to the experts.

Knowledge is power

Phil Waknell, co-founder of communication and presentation agency Ideas On Stage , suggests getting out of your own head as the starting point for writing a speech:

“Tailor your speech to your audience: it’s theirs, not yours. Speak to them specifically and personally, using relevant examples and stories where possible.

“If you make it clear that this isn’t the same speech you would give – or have given many times – to other audiences, they will listen more attentively and appreciate the effort that you’ve made to adapt to them.”

In essence, everyone likes to feel special, even in a virtual room of avatars. Understanding your audience, where they’re coming from and what makes them tick will play to your advantage before you’ve even begun typing.

What’s the story?

This may seem like an extremely basic starting point, but establishing the story that you’re trying to tell (or sell) from the outset is key to the eventual success of a speech. Phil explains why consistent, engaging narratives are so important:

“People forget facts and general statements, but our minds light up when we hear real, concrete stories, meaning that we listen intently and remember so much more of the detail in the stories, and therefore the speech.”

We’re not suggesting that you go in with a ‘book at bedtime’ approach, but painting a vivid picture to illustrate your point will capture your audience’s attention and imagination while improving their retention of your speech in the long term. Phil advises focusing on the “emotional journey” of a speech rather than reeling off information or stringing together logical arguments. While the latter approach works well for a written essay, even the most formal of speeches needs to centre on emotional and attention-grabbing ‘hooks. That said, ensure that your register is appropriate for the occasion…

Set the tone

Before you fall into TED Talk induced overwhelm, retired paediatrician, university lecturer and now wildlife photographer Dr Mark Hunter underlines that there are fewer ‘types’ of speech than you might imagine:

“There are three main goals when giving a speech – to entertain, to teach/inform or to persuade. There’s limited crossover between these types and even ceremonial speeches adhere to this categorisation, for example the aim of a wedding speech is to entertain while a eulogy is an education about the life of the deceased.”

With this in mind, Mark emphasises that it’s vital to establish why you’re making a speech and briefly explain your credentials for doing so to the audience too:

“Introduce yourself (it’s rude not to), explain where you’re taking the audience and justify your talk before delivering the main substance. Then end with a summary, conclusion or punchline that’ll resonate long after you’ve left the stage or pressed ‘Leave Meeting’.”

As for that punchline, Mark has a pointer on comedy:

“Tread carefully when it comes to humour. If you’re going there, make sure that any jokes are genuinely funny (road test them on a close, captive audience beforehand) and that you know your audience well. Don’t let humour distract from a serious talk.”

That’s not to say that a phenomenal finale is off the cards…

‘Sandwich’ your speech

Creating a striking entrance and exit is the distinguishing feature of a rousing speech. Just as an audience’s attention is held rapt by a suspenseful, intriguing or heartfelt story, so a powerful catchphrase or statement will live on in your audience’s memory. Malala Yousafza i’s 2013 address to the UN highlighting every child’s right to education is one such compelling close (“one child, one teacher, one pen and one book can change the world”) while Greta Thunberg ’s searing opener at the 2019 UN Climate Change Summit (“this is all wrong; I shouldn’t be up here”) had the world and its leaders hanging onto her every word from the off.

Phil affirms that how you bookend your speech makes all the difference between an attentive audience and an AWOL one:

“Aim to provoke an emotional reaction within the first 30 seconds. Grab their attention and make the audience realise that they will actively enjoy your speech as well as gain or learn something from it. Make them smile, make them laugh (if that’s appropriate), make them raise their eyebrows – just don’t make them bored.”

Go analogue

From there, Phil advocates taking a step back from Microsoft Office:

“When you’re writing a speech, don’t just reel it off verbatim in Word or PowerPoint. Begin with sticky notes or notecards and write down one salient idea per card. Assemble your ideas into a storyline that will reset the audience’s attention every few minutes.”

Mark adds that the average audience’s attention span peaks at between 15-20 minutes, so don’t try to stuff in too much – stick to three main points, max. He advises keeping props minimal (if you’re using them) and if you’re presenting slides opt for clear fonts written large and in monochrome, ideally with headings that ‘fly’ in to prevent your audience from reading ahead. Mark also urges you to construct your speech in a way that will work if tech or add-ons fail you. You don’t want to be held hostage by dodgy wifi.

Finally, if you’re still up a speech-writing creek without a paddle, heed the ultimate public speaking wisdom of former US president Franklin D. Roosevelt:

“Be sincere; be brief; be seated.”

If you like this article then you will LOVE the rest of our Personal Growth section where you can find articles on everything from ‘How to Feng Shui your Office’ to ‘How to keep relationships intact despite differing political views.’

← Older Post Newer Post →

Personal Growth

How to Feng Shui your home office

Feng Shui Master Priya Sher explains how to maximise your home office for success

Human trafficking: How to spot it and what you can do to help

There are a reported 40.3 million adults and children trafficked in the world today. Here’s why we need to act.

• All Insights
• Top-Rated Articles
• How-to Guides
• For Parents

Explained: The BP Debate Format

British Parliamentary debate , also known as BP debate , is one of the more complicated formats of Parliamentary debate. For this reason, it is usually tackled by debaters who have already mastered other formats of debate like World Schools or Public Forum debate .

In this article, we'll look at some of the key features of the BP debate format and how it works in the debating room.

Overview of BP Debate

Unlike in debate formats you may have previously learned, in BP debate, each round includes four teams with two debaters on each team .

• The government bench consists of the two government teams, Opening Government (OG) and Closing Government (CG) , which are arguing in favor of the motion.
• The opposition bench consists of the two opposition teams, Opening Opposition (OO) and Closing Opposition (CO) , which are arguing against the motion.

The first two teams in the debate, OG and OO, are sometimes called the opening half , while the third and fourth teams, CG and CO, are sometimes called the closing half .

Naturally, the two government teams are competing against the two opposition teams. What's interesting about BP debate, though, is that you are also competing against the other team on your bench .

If you're Opening Government, you want to do better than not only Opening Opposition and Closing Opposition but also Closing Government. The key is to show that you've made better arguments and contributed more to the debate without contradicting or rebutting the points of the other team on the same side.

At the end of the debate, all four teams are ranked from first to fourth independently of their benches .

BP Debate Speaker Roles

After 15 minutes of preparation time, each speaker will deliver a 7-minute speech. Each of the eight speakers in a BP debate has a different role.

• The first speaker of the OG, the  Prime Minister , is in charge of starting the debate. They should define the motion and advance 2-3 arguments in favor of their side.
• The first speaker of the OO, the Leader of the Opposition , should rebut the OG's case and advance their own .
• The second speaker of the OG, the Deputy Prime Minister , should refute the Leader of the Opposition's arguments and add to the OG's case .
• The second speaker of the OO, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition , should continue to rebut the OG's case and advance their own .
• Now the first speaker of the CG, the Member of Government , should bring an extension or new material distinct from but consistent with the OG's arguments.
• The first speaker of the CO, the Member of Opposition , should similarly bring an extension distinct from but consistent with the OO's arguments.
• Here's where it gets tricky. The second speaker of the CG, the Government Whip , should engage with and rebut all arguments from the opposition bench . Without adding new arguments, their job is to conclusively show why the CG won the debate over all three other teams.
• The second speaker of the CO, the Opposition Whip , should similarly engage with and rebut all arguments from the government bench . Without adding new arguments, their job is to conclusively show why the CO won the debate.

Being a whip isn't easy — you have to listen carefully to the entire debate and weigh your arguments against everyone else's. A good whip is essential to BP debate!

Key Elements of BP Debate

The CG and CO are both responsible for introducing extensions , which extend the arguments of the opening half, develop them in new directions, or come up with new analyses, examples, and refutations. These are critical for progressing the debate.

Points of information , which are questions or refutations offered during opposing speeches, follow the same rules in BP debate as in World Schools debate . However, they can only be asked to the two teams on the opposite bench.

Lastly, in BP debate, there are no reply or summary speeches .

Although it may seem complicated, BP debate is one of the most popular debate formats in the world for a reason. It can lead to some of the liveliest and most exciting debates.

If you're ready to give it a shot, check out our BP competitions for upcoming BP debate opportunities.

You might also be interested in how to win a BP debate !

Related Insights

Bp debate topics: what they are and how to prepare, how to win a bp debate, what's the difference between bp & pf debate.

• 5 Prep Tips for BP
• Top Speech Introductions
• Public Speaking and Debate Competitions
• Incorporating Humor
• Logical Fallacies
• How-To: Prepare for Debate Tournaments
• How-To: Judge a Debate
• How-To: Win a BP Debate
• How-To: Win An Argument
• How-To: Improve at Home
• Team China Wins World Championship
• Ariel Wins Tournament
• Jaxon Speaks Up
• Tina Improves

Get the Reddit app

/r/Debate is a subreddit dedicated to discussing formal styles of speech debate as practiced in high school and college. These include Lincoln Douglas, Policy, Public Forum, Parliamentary, and Congressional Debates, as well as speech events like Original Oratory, Interpretation, and Extemporaneous Speaking.

What exactly is a reply speech and how to compose it?

It's my first debate and I'm still confused with how you adjudicate "biasedly". How should it differ from the first three speeches, aside from it being a summary of the whole debate? Is there any format/rules in adjudicating? And am I supposed to pick their weak points when weighing down things to make it on our favor or something?

I'm having difficulty on looking for examples so it'll be really great if you could give some. Thank you!

latest in US News

Whistleblower on alleged Bahamas police corruption shot during...

Endangered wolf species pups born at US zoo, marking significant...

RFK Jr. gets cheers in Vegas as he pledges to unify the nation,...

Elon Musk donates ‘sizable amount’ to pro-Trump super PAC:...

Top Michigan Democrats, including Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, bail on...

Biggest Democratic super PAC buys ads in key swing states to...

Dad of convicted 'Rust' armorer reacts to Alec Baldwin's...

Majority of swing-state voters believe vaping is as bad as or...

Desperate single mom jumps on hood of car to save 6-year-old son from carjacking and is thrown to her death in ohio.

• View Author Archive
• Get author RSS feed

Thanks for contacting us. We've received your submission.

A desperate Ohio single mom died Thursday when she was thrown from the hood of her own car while trying to save her 6-year-old son during an attempted carjacking. 

Alexa Stakely, 29, pounced onto the front of her Honda and wound up smashing her head on the pavement after two suspects attempted to take the car while her son, Deluca, was sleeping inside outside a babysitter’s home in Columbus.

“She’s always been a very special person to me and was always extremely wise and a very bright kid,” Stakely’s younger step brother Hayden Swartz told The Post Friday.

“She didn’t grow up under the best circumstances family-wise, but always made the most of every situation and had a very glass-half-full view of everything. She crushed every goal she made for herself.” 

Stakely, a preschool teacher, had been picking up her son from his babysitter at an apartment complex at about 1:30 a.m. when the tragic incident occurred, cops said.

After putting the older boy in the car, she double-backed inside the house to grab something she had forgotten, police said.

When she returned, she saw the vehicle beginning to back from its parking space and realized a thief was stealing it with by the child inside.

She leaped onto the front of the car and was thrown from the vehicle as the crook tried to race away.

She slammed her head on the pavement and later died at Mount Carmel East hospital.

The thieves stopped the car nearby in the complex’s parking lot, hopped out and escaped over a fence.

Two men matching the same description as the suspects were caught on surveillance video, but remain at large.

Community members flooded the Columbus Division Police Facebook to mourn and call on the community to seek justice for her.

Stakely worked as a speech and language pathologist in Canal Westchester Schools. She was coming from her waitress shift, a second job she worked to help support her family, when she was picking up her son.

Swartz recalled one night when Stakely was in high school where she set aside her mountain of homework to help him study for an exam – showing she already had all the qualities of a good teacher before she even started on that path. 

“She sat me down and was like ‘you’re gonna ace this test tomorrow’ and we studied for it all night,” Swartz said.

“She made a bunch of flash cards for me and she sat me down and we studied all night long.” 

He said the family has gotten a large outpouring of support.

“We’ve had a lot of people reach out who knew her, whether they taught her kids or worked with her, everybody says the same thing, that her personality was so bubbly and that she had a positive impact on everyone,” Swartz said.  

Advertisement

• Action/Adventure
• Children's/Family
• Documentary/Reality
• Amazon Prime Video

More From Decider

Were Rats Scurrying Across The Screen In 'The Bachelorette' Season 21...

Bette Midler Tearfully Shuts Down Hoda Kotb's Questioning During Emotional...

Netflix Basic Plan Discontinued: Is Netflix Getting Rid Of Its Cheapest...

Michael Strahan Returns To 'Good Morning America' After Two Weeks Off The...

'The Bear' Season 3 Review: Carmy Secures His Role as The Chairman of The...

R.I.P. Martin Mull: 'Clue' & 'Roseanne' Star Dead at 80

Every Kevin Costner Movie Is A Western (Even When They're Not)

Nicole Kidman Tore Zac Efron’s Shirt Off in One Take, Says ‘A Family...

Share this:.

• Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window)
• Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window)
• Click to copy URL

What Time Is The Biden News Conference? How To Watch The President’s Speech Tonight

“mad” joy behar, sunny hostin call out george clooney for turning on biden: “aired this dirty laundry to the world”, alyssa farah griffin accuses the biden administration of “gaslighting” americans on ‘the view’ , ‘jimmy kimmel live’: kathryn hahn doubts donald trump could last longer “than he lasted with stormy” in a golf match with biden , george clooney begs joe biden to drop out weeks after raising $30 million for his campaign: “it’s devastating to say it”.

President Joe Biden will be speaking at a news conference tonight amid growing concerns that he is no longer mentally fit to run for office or hold a second term as president.

This news conference is yet another attempt from the White House to assuage voters’ fears after his disappointing performance at the June 27 debate against Donald Trump . The president is reportedly facing internal pressure, as well as pressure from high-profile supporters such as George Clooney , to end his campaign while there’s still time.

“Folks, I might not walk as easily or talk as smoothly as I used to. I might not debate as well as I used to. But what I do know is how to tell the truth,” Biden wrote in a post on X after the debate.

He later sat down with ABC News’ George Stephanopolous to assert that he simply had “a bad episode” that evening. “If the Lord Almighty came down and said, ‘Joe, get outta the race,’ I’d get outta the race. The Lord Almighty’s not comin’ down,” he said, per NBC News . “I don’t think anybody’s more qualified to be president or win this race than me.”

Now, the president is set to hold a press conference from the Walter E. Washington Convention Center, where he will accept questions from the White House press corps tonight. Per The New York Times , Biden has held the least amount of news conferences of any president since President Ronald Reagan. This marks his first press conference since November 2023.

Here’s everything you need to know about the Biden press conference today.

What will Biden be asked at the news conference?

According to sources familiar with the matter, an internal White House planning document lists questions about Biden’s age and health, and why he should stay in the race, amongst other topics, per The New York Times .

This is likely to help Biden prepare for possible questions from the press. But it is not standard for questions to be shared ahead of a news conference.

What time is the Biden press conference today?

Biden is scheduled to begin taking questions from reporters at 6:30 p.m. ET.

Where to watch the Biden press conference:

The Biden press conference will likely air on many major news networks such as NBC, ABC, CNN, CBS and more, which can be streamed on platforms including FuboTV and  DirecTV Stream , as well as YouTube TV and Hulu + Live TV .

How can I watch Biden’s press conference for free?

Several news outlets will be live streaming the press conference for free once it begins Thursday evening, including NBC News and AP News .

The White House will also be live streaming the event on YouTube .

Michael Strahan Returns To 'Good Morning America' After Two Weeks Off The Air — Where He Was And Why He Was Away

Bette Midler Tearfully Shuts Down Hoda Kotb's Questioning During Emotional 'Today' Interview: "Please Don't Make Me Cry"

When Will 'Power Book II: Ghost' Season 4, Episode 6 Premiere on Starz?

'Live': Mark Consuelos Asks Tyler Perry Why He And Kelly Ripa "Have Never Been" In One Of His Movies After Learning Two 'All My Children' Alum Are In His Latest Film

I Found The Chicago Tribune's Restaurant Review of "The Bear," The Windy City's Hottest New Eatery

Michael Douglas Stuns 'The View' By Revealing Catherine Zeta-Jones' Demand When She Beats Him In Golf: "Whip It Out"

• Share full article

Advertisement

Subscriber-only Newsletter

John McWhorter

Miracle whip, onboarding and the wonders of the english language.

By John McWhorter

Opinion Writer

On a Zoom call recently, someone mentioned the “onboarding” of a new workplace policy. She pronounced it with the accent on the first syllable — “ON-boarding” — even though we pronounce the original expression “on BOARD.” Believe it or not, this got me thinking about mayonnaise.

More specifically, it reminded me of an old radio commercial that has always stuck in my mind for the way, in the last line, the announcer pronounces the name of the product with a subtle emphasis on the last word: “Miracle WHIP.” (He made it sound rather exquisite: “Miracle Whip has such a wonderful flavor — lively and teasing, peppy and yet not a bit too sharp. It’s a flavor that’s just exactly right!”) Today we put the weight on the first word, “MIRACLE Whip.”

If you listen for it, you can hear a similar shift in many different places. A character in a 1930s gangster movie I saw accused another of acting like a “big SHOT.” I distinctly remember a friend excitedly telling me in 1977 that he had just seen a neat new movie called “Star WARS.”

They all follow the same pattern: As names and phrases become familiar, speakers tend to start shifting the emphasis to the front. It happens gradually, but the result can be unmistakable, leaving the original pronunciation to sound odd and dated.

That radio commercial is from 1951, when the condiment was still newer to the market. Initially one referred to it as a kind of whip that was designated a miracle, a miracle WHIP, like a magic CARPET or a silver FLUTE. But many people encounter Miracle Whip more often than magic carpets or silver flutes. As the condiment became familiar to American consumers, the emphasis shifted.

In that same commercial, the announcer calls it a “salad DRESSing” instead of our more common “SALad dressing.” And the same goes for the communication platform that people are today more likely to call “WHATSapp,” rather than “WhatsAPP,” as they did when it first came into wide circulation. The shift happened as the term became commonplace.

We are having trouble retrieving the article content.

Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and  log into  your Times account, or  subscribe  for all of The Times.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access.

Already a subscriber?  Log in .

Want all of The Times?  Subscribe .