Abstract

When writers communicate risks about hazardous technologies, they need to realize that their persuasive purposes cannot be to resolve debate but rather to evoke consensus and to encourage new ways of talking about risk issues. To gain insight into achieving such purposes, rhetoricians can learn from theories in the social science subdisciplines of risk perception and communication. Theorists in these fields identify various psychological, social, political, and cultural dynamics that risk communicators must address in order to generate new processes of debate. I apply many of these theoretical principles to a sample risk communication on nuclear energy to determine realistic expectations for persuasive risk communications. My conclusions stress that rhetorical researchers need to explore and test the extent to which written rhetorical forms can facilitate consensus.