The Q&A with LA Times journalist and Loyola College alumni, Michael Memoli, was an hour-long event where Mike spoke of his career in journalism, how he got there, what specifically he reports, and then allowed an open floor to the audience to bring up other questions in order to dig deeper into his experiences within his career. His interview relates to what we do in class because he specializes in the reporting of political science in the real world. Memoli spoke of his jobs following candidates, literally accompanying them on planes, buses, and to various events across the country, in order to be able to report the truth about how they act, the things they do, what they say, and their intentions vs. their actual actions. As a journalist of presidential candidacy, Memoli could go about his articles in one of two ways: either using a bias based on how he has seen the candidate, which would require him to use rhetoric in his article to make the reader believe his angle in writing his piece; or by trying to be unbiased, which causes Memoli to avoid using rhetoric. However as we have studied in class, just about anything that anyone does, says or writes always has an aura of rhetoric to it. Memoli could try to be unbiased about the candidates, but in turn would end up using rhetoric to try to persuade the reader that both candidates are equally good/bad, or use rhetoric to try to convince the reader that he does not have a bias at all. I’m sure that in certain articles of his, Memoli has picked a side, for instance when he followed Hillary Clinton around he may have written an article about how she acts in real life. As he described to us during the Q&A, Memoli found Clinton to be a generally nice woman when she stepped out of her “candidate costume” so to say. Therefore, an article written about Clinton’s actions throughout the day may result in him discussing her natural being when she acts less professional behind the scenes, which would be a form of him using rhetoric to persuade his audience that she is also a normal human being. Another form of rhetoric Memoli could have used in his writing is ethos if he talks about his experiences or his position in the introduction of an article to establish his credibility to the reader prior to discussing the topic at hand so they trust his word while reading, or feel more inclined to finish the article because of his credentials. These are a few connections I made between Memoli’s Q&A and Eloquentia Perfecta.