Mary Windsor* - University of Wisconsin - La Crosse
Ian Muehlenhaus* - University of Wisconsin - La Crosse
Maps are tools for geocommunication. All forms of geocommunication posit arguments about the state of our world; they make geo-arguments. However, as is true with any form of communication, some methods of geocommunication will prove more effective at persuading audiences than others. This research examines the persuasive impact that different map rhetorical styles have on map readers when viewing controversial subject matter that has no direct impact on their well-being. Four maps promoting Norway's sovereign right to whale hunt were designed using four different rhetorical styles. All of these maps, regardless of style, argue that Norway should have the right to whale hunt. These same four rhetorical styles have been shown to have different effects on map readers who viewed radiation data from a hypothetical nuclear meltdown (Muehlenhaus, 2012). The different impact these four whaling maps had on people's opinions regarding whale hunting are reviewed and compared to the previous study. Also, differences among the maps regarding map interpretation and trust are reviewed.