Protester and Shell Oil communications illustrate rhetorical devices, reasoning, and evidence. Dutch activist investor Follow This, which owns Shell stock, pushed for a shareholder resolution to reduce carbon emissions by 2030. As protesters stormed the annual meeting, they illustrated rhetorical devices communication faculty might teach as a way to appeal to emotion and make speech more memorable. “Hit the Road Jack,” and “Go to hell, Shell, and don’t you come back no more” illustrate an allusion to a popular song and assonance, or vowel rhyming.

On page 8 of the annual investor meeting notice, Shell executives explain three reasons for shareholders to reject the resolution:

• Against shareholders’ interests: The company claims it would give up profits, but protesters say the company has had record profits (and, I suppose, can give some up?). The company argues that the proposition “would not help to mitigate global warming,” but evidence is not provided.

• Against good governance: The company argues that the proposition is “unclear, generic, and would create confusion as to Board and shareholder accountabilities.” With criteria reasoning, executives say that Shell already has a shareholder-approved strategy in place, so this new guidance would conflict. They also claim that any change is merely advisory and that “the legal responsibility for approving or objecting to Shell’s strategy lies with the Board and Executive Committee.”

• Negative consequences for customers: This section includes causal reasoning that hasty shifts “could cause disruptions to the world’s energy system, with the risk of shortages and high energy prices.” Skeptics might say this is a slippery slope fallacy. Then, the next two confusing paragraphs have footnotes to Shell's own site (not an external source):

  • As an energy user, Shell has set a bold target to reduce absolute emissions from its operations (Scope 1 and 2), by 50% by 2030, compared with its 2016 reference year. Shell delivered a 30% reduction at the end of 2022, compared with 2016 on a net basis. Global energy-related carbon emissions increased by around 4% in the same period. [A]

  • As an energy provider, Shell has set a target to reduce the net carbon intensity of the energy products it sells by 20% by 2030. It has achieved a 3.8% reduction since 2016. Our analysis, using data from the International Energy Agency, shows the net carbon intensity of the global energy system fell by around 2% over that same time. [B]

On its website, Follow This announces that the proposition was voted down. However, in a press release, the group emphasizes a relatively high percentage of supporting votes: “One-fifth of Shell shareholders maintain demand for emissions reductions to meet Paris by voting for Follow This climate resolution.” The group founder puts this figure in context, a common persuasive tactic: “Considering that up to 99% of shareholders voted along with the board on the other 25 resolutions, 20% of support and a significant number of abstentions in spite of a negative board recommendation clearly indicates shareholder discontent.” As an example of synecdoche, the group refers to “Paris,” meaning the U.N. Paris Agreement to limit average temperature increases.

Students will find other examples of rhetorical devices and methods used to persuade in both organizations’ communications.