When impacting, extempers are encouraged to impact generously, backed up by evidence on the scale of destruction, death tolls, and more. However, it is important to ensure that your delivery does not feel as though you are taking advantage of or disrespecting those impacted, treating them as nothing more than a statistic.
As advocates on critical issues and students interested in the study of the world and, by extension, its citizens, it is essential to treat those affected as human, giving their lives the meaning and dignity they deserve.
When discussing violence, public health crises, infrastructure failures, or conflict, those numbers represent real people. To responsibly navigate these topics with your audience, here are strategies to amplify emotional impact while ensuring you come across as respectful, earnest, and informed.
When to Use Human-Life Impacts
Human-life statistics can elevate a point or statement of significance by tying your argument to the real world and demonstrating the tangible consequences of an action.
In an econ round, where exacting policy projections and data-backed numerical impact will likely be the norm, grounding your argument in lived human consequences can differentiate you. In foreign relations questions, where you have more room to impact freely, these statistics can foster greater empathy in-round and reinforce urgency.
However, the purpose should not be shock value. The statistic should clarify why the issue matters, revealing a deeper truth about the issue.
The Two-Pronged Statement of Significance
Within your Statement of Significance (SOS), if you are using a statistic, consider how you frame it.
For example:
“Considering that just yesterday, 100 Americans passed away due to poor water infrastructure.”
While impactful, this risks sounding more informative than concerned. Instead, consider taking a two-pronged approach to balance the statistic and acknowledge what it emotionally represents.
A) Use the Statistic as a Gateway to a Structural Issue
Allow the number to serve as a lead-in to a broader social problem:
“Considering that just yesterday, 100 Americans passed away due to poor water infrastructure, but also, because water contamination disproportionately impacts lower-income communities, this crisis is truly urgent.”
Here, the statistic is not standing alone. It becomes evidence of a larger reform message, thereby adding value through alluding to a larger inequity that these lives were lost as a result of.
B) Build Empathy Through Shared Values
Alternatively, add meaning by tying the statistic to a principle your audience likely holds:
“Considering that just yesterday, 100 Americans passed away due to poor water infrastructure, but also, because clean water should be a human right, not a privilege, reform is overdue.”
This works because your judge likely has and values their access to clean water. By articulating that shared value, you gain credibility and deepen empathy, which will help you along the rest of your speech.
Emotional Delivery
Within your points, you will undoubtedly use impactful statistics involving human life. Rather than avoiding these measures of impact, focus on conveying that you understand the weight of what you are saying.
Pause before delivering the statistic. Lower your voice slightly. Slow your pacing. Do not present it in the same purely informative tone you use for economic projections.
Utilizing the seven voices of extemp and intentionally pacing how you deliver can signal sincerity. At the same time, ensure that these moments are clearly separated from humorous hooks or light transitions. Emotional contrast helps signal to your judge the serious nature of what you are saying.
Final Thought
Impacting to human life is often necessary in extemp, so the takeaway isn’t to completely avoid them. Rather, when you balance evidence with empathy, you strengthen both your credibility and your impact.