Topical and narrative models work really well, but then there are times when maybe your audience doesn't know much about the topic or the person. Now, in those cases, you kind of need to help them out. You need to give them information while at the same time highlighting shared values. If you're at a wedding, the audience probably knows the couple, right? That's why they're there. If you're introducing a speaker, the audience may know nothing about them. So, in those cases, you need to blend in forming with valuing and this might mean focusing on the subjects accomplishments, for example. This often happens in award speeches. So, here, you might start out with an opener that sets the tone, and then go through and tick off some of their major accomplishments. This is stuff that the audience might not know. Then, maybe you jump back and talk a little bit more about their personality, if it's a person, and you use that as a way of highlighting some key values. Usually, speeches like this allow you to transition into a discussion of the person, or organization, or event impact, or maybe you have lessons we can take away from this subject and then you sort of tidy up and evaluating conclusion. That's if you're sort of unaccomplished based approach. Now, if you need to tell us more about the subject, basic stuff like who the person is, when or why the organization was founded, well, then maybe you talk more about background. I'm not too dissimilar, right? You start off, you spend some time talking about the background of this subject, so this is kind of your informative section. Basically, you're bringing the audience up to speed on this topic, and then, just like before, you talk about accomplishments of the subject and possibly the larger impact or meaning of the topic before you start wrapping up. I actually have an example of this. I don't have video of this. I've just got the speech text. This speech comes from a dedication ceremony for a new postage stamp, and the speech was delivered by Joshua Colin the vice president for area operations in the US Postal Service. I know the speech not because like I keep a close eye on postage performances. That's not really what I'm tuned into. I appreciate philatelists. I do not count myself among their numbers. I know the speech because the speechwriter won the Cicero speech writing awards in 2016. The awards are run by the magazine Vital Speeches of the Day. That's how I came to see this speech, but basically, what this is, is this is a speech introducing a commemorative stamp for Richard Allen. Allen was a bishop in the African Methodist Episcopal Church or AME church. I liked the speech because it's an example of how to respond to the challenge of valuing a historical person, while also providing lots of information about that person. Now, of course, many in the audience would know some of this information, that is why would they show up, right? You probably don't have people in the audience who are like, I love stamps, don't care what's on it. I love stamps, I've cover myself in stamps and mail myself to myself, right? You're probably not going to have that, well I hope you, and that's pretty hard audience to speak to. No, probably the audience knows something about Bishop Allen, but they may not know everything. So the speech needs to both value and provide some new and interesting information. Even telling the history is probably part of recognizing and valuing the person. In the speeches, here's what we have. The speech opens by identifying the subject, Bishop Allen. We then have quotations supporting how important he was, he was referred to as America's black founding father, and then we get a history lesson so we jump back in time. Allen was born in 1760 on a Delaware plantation. Early on, he found religion, he bought his freedom with money earned from extra work. He then made his way through the colonies preaching and taking odd jobs, and finally, he arrived in Philadelphia where he started preaching at the church where he built most of his reputation. That's kind of the first big chunk. The speakers providing information, but he's also lasing in some stylistic talk her too, a line or two. This opening section, this background checks isn't just an information plot. But after that, then we shift over to accomplishments and impact. Since he's a historical figure, it's still kind of some history, but this section is really more focused on what Allen accomplished. We hear, "Oh, he fought for inclusion. His church was an important stop on the Underground Railroad. His church was important in the War of 1812. " That's one section, and then we shift over and we've got a separate section with support about his impact. Here, we've got testimony from Frederick Douglass and Martin Luther King, talking about how important Allen was. Again, the section is shoring up that value claim, that he was an important figure. Then the speaker links all this to the actual event so they bring us back from history to the present moment interpreting this event. Speakers says, "Oh, we're here today to honor Allen with this stamp," he tells a little bit about the stamp. It's the 39th stamp on the Black Heritage Series. They say, "Oh, we're proud to offer it." Then, the speaker concludes with a tie back to the values of faith and perseverance. That speech, I like it. It's not a dry history lesson. It's not purely a discussion of values, it's a mix and I think that's important, if I have one tip for informing ceremonial speeches, it would be this, find the balance between informing and valuing. Maybe an intro speech tilts more towards informing, right? You need to make sure the audience knows stuff. Maybe a dedication speech tilts more towards valuing, right? That audiences at the dedication for a reason, but finding this balance means knowing your rhetorical situation. What information needs to be conveyed so that the audience understands? What information needs to be conveyed in order to properly honor that subject?