1

Ariel Niforatos, Sierra Avery, Yutong Liu

Dr. Erin McLaughlin
WR-13300-11
Companion Paper for Satirical Video
3/19/16
The University of Notre Dame is a beautiful place. Complete with budding flowers,
pristine buildings, and our very own touchdown Jesus. Here, we foster the growth of mind,
body, and spirit. But there has been a growing danger that threatens NDs very existence the
increasing number of lower class students on campus we call them LNDs.
At the start of the video, the viewer is greeted with this statement which illustrates the
central issue the video focuses on the socioeconomic classes of students here at Notre
Dame. The University of Notre Dame is ranked among the top 20 universities in the United
States, and is famous not only for its brilliant academics and beautiful campus, but especially
for its commitment to serving the community. Among its vibrant student body, poverty is
often a central topic of concern, and each year many Notre Dame students and scholars
devote themselves to serving the poor and searching for solutions to poverty. However, there
is an underlying problem at Notre Dame that many do not realize or choose to over look the
underrepresentation of students from middle/lower class families. According to Quest bridge,
only 14% of Notre Dames students have family incomes below 60,000$, and only 12% of
students receive Federal Pell Grants, which mostly goes to students whose family incomes
are lower than 40,000$ (Quest Bridge, 2015). When compared to the national average family
income of 51,939$ (U.S. Census Bureau, 2014), these data show that only around 13% of
Notre Dames students represent the middle/lower class of the United States. The
socioeconomic diversity of students at Notre Dame is extremely lacking, and, with its 74%

2
white population, almost turns Notre Dames devotion to serving the poor into a game for
the rich white people.
Focusing on the issue of the lack of socioeconomic diversity on campus, this video
promotes the active engagement of the issue of socioeconomic class and the growth of the
underrepresented middle/lower class students on campus through representing the small
percentage of middle/lower class students on campus as a threat to the universitys reputation
and existence, and through proposing measures to eliminate lower class students on campus.
The central argument of the video is that the problem of socioeconomic diversity should not
be considered touchy and shunned, and that the university and student body should work to
promote it. To illustrate this argument, the video demonized the lower class student
population in a progressive manner from accusing the lower class students of stealing
fruits from the valuable resource of the dinning halls and putting bikes into trees, to saying
that they undermine the traditions of Notre Dame by not wearing ND apparel, to pointing out
that their financial aid takes a large chunk out of the universitys funding. The intention of
this is to gradually create a sense of cognitive dissonance in the minds of the viewers, which
allow them to focus on the actualities of the socioeconomic classes at Notre Dame. The latter
part of the video continues to expand this sense of dissonance by proposing different policies
to keep lower class students out of Notre Dame and make ND great again. These measures
include escorting lower class students on campus by campus police, mandatory labeling of
lower class students on their student ids, and eliminating lower class applicants in the
admissions process. Some of these measures alludes to ones used by the Nazis against the
Jewish people during WWII, and, combined with the demonization in the first half of the
video, creates a surreal feeling inside the minds of the views. This surreal feeling can then be
transferred onto the realities of the lower class students here at Notre Dame and promote
progressive thinking on the issue of socioeconomic diversity.

3
The editing of the video also helps to support its central argument. Judith Lancioni
said in her work The Rhetoric of the Frame that Viewers construct meaning from the
relationship of shot to shot, and form the rhythm of the cutting, all of which contribute to a
films visual rhythms and constitute an important aspect of the rhetoric. (109) This video
utilizes a controlled rhythm to show its meaning. The oscillation between shots demonizing
lower class students and illustrating Nazi like policies and shots depicting the suited
spokesperson and the beautiful campus helps to strengthen the satirical element of the the
video and reflect its deeper message of the absurdness of the lack of socioeconomic diversity
on campus. Lancioni also said that Singling out an individual by reframing a group shot as a
close-up invites viewer to speculate on the diverse ways of seeing and thinking about the
subjects. (112) Reframing has been extensively used in our editing process as a tool to make
the views think about the issue of socioeconomic diversity. In the scene that the spokesperson
accuses the lower class students of not honoring ND tradition by not wearing The Shirt to
home football games, pictures of students at home games are shown in the video and later
reframed to focus on the one person who is not wearing the shirt. Later in the video, a
segment of mostly well dressed upper class students and few lower class students was
shown and then it was edited so that the lower class students would fade away from the
frame, leaving only the well-dressed students. Reframing allows the video to illustrate its
underlying message on the issue of the lack of socioeconomic diversity, and the viewers to
reflect on their experience with and views on socioeconomic class here at ND.
Dustin Griffin identified four assumptions towards satire in his book Satire: A
Critical Reintroduction. They are the bipolar blame and praise core, the measure of
deviations against some moral standing, appealing to traditionally sanctioned virtues, and
persuading the audience to virtue. (37) This video fulfills all these characteristics. At its
core it blames the actions that lowers socioeconomic diversity at ND and praises those that

4
promotes it; it measures the deviations of the actions against socioeconomic diversity against
the traditionally sanctioned virtue of inclusiveness; it also ultimately tries to persuade the
audience to promote socioeconomic diversity by showing the absurdity of the opposite
action.
Herrick said in his Overview of Rhetoric that Rhetoric, plays many important
social roles. (14) As a piece of satirical rhetoric itself, this video also intended to fulfill
several social functions.
The main function of this video is to draw attention to the lack of socioeconomic
diversity at Notre Dame and to advocate for a more diverse student body. As Harrick said,
The art of rhetoric is the method by which we advocate ideas we believe to be important.
(17) This function is fulfilled through satirizing the subject of the issue lower class students,
and through creating cognitive dissonance between the lower class students in the video and
the lower class students in reality, which forces the viewer to reflect on the issue of
socioeconomic diversity.
A fourth important function of rhetoric is that it helps us to discover facts and truths
that are critical to decision making. (Harrick, 20) Another social function that this video tries
to fulfill is to help the viewer discover the truths about lower class students at Notre Dame.
Since the socioeconomic classes of students at ND is not a popular topic on Notre Dames
campus; therefore, not many facts are known about them. This video intends to inform the
viewer facts about the non-existence of socioeconomic diversity at Notre Dame through
presenting exaggerated statements about lower class students at ND.
an important link exists between social knowledge and rhetorical practices.
(Herrick, 20) The last social function this video fulfills is to shape our knowledge of
socioeconomic diversity on campus. This is partially accomplished through helping the
viewers to discover facts about the representation of lower/middle class students on campus,

5
but also relies on the absurdity created by the video and brought back into real life by the
viewer, which allows the viewer to challenge the socioeconomic norm of ND and build up
his/her knowledge of socioeconomic diversity.
The target audiences of this video are the current students at Notre Dame, the
university administration, and university donors. We hope to raise awareness of the lack of
socioeconomic diversity among the student body and inspire them to gain more
understanding of the lower class students on campus. We also hope to inform the
administrators of the university and the donors of this issue to stimulate policy changes and
more funding towards financial assistance.
Notre Dame has a community that prizes itself for its commitment to service and
inclusiveness toward people from all backgrounds. Through making this satirical video about
Notre Dames lack of socioeconomic diversity, we mean not to undermine what is treasured
by the Notre Dame community, but hope that a more diverse campus can be established in the
near future. We hope to make Notre Dame great again.

6
Works Cited
Lancioni, Judith. "The Rhetoric of the Frame Revisioning Archival Photographs in
The Civil War." Western Journal of Communication 60.4 (1996): 397-414. Web.
Herrick, James A. The History and Theory of Rhetoric: An Introduction. Boston:
Allyn and Bacon, 2005. Print.
"University of Notre Dame." Overview. Web. 19 Mar. 2016.
<http://www.questbridge.org/notredame-overview>.
Griffin, Dustin H. Satire: A Critical Reintroduction. Lexington, KY: U of Kentucky,
1994. Print.