I need an example non-prejudicial rhetoric.

If you take the definition of rhetoric as speech intended to persuade, probably one of the most persuasive lines was John F. Kennedy's admonition to "Ask not what your country can do for you; ask what you can do for your country."

Or how about Franklin D. Roosevelt's, "We have nothing to fear but fear itself"?

Another way of analyzing prejudical rhetoric is this:

Record 5 minutes of the Fox News Channel. Then transcribe what was said. You can see that about 90 percent of what is stated is prejudical rhetoric. Then try to rewrite the stated words makeing it non-prejudical. Watch the meaning of prejudical: Content or images that are intended to form a conclusion or way of thinking on a subject before all the facts are presented.

I grew up in the South in a time where Jews, Negros, and non-English foreigners were mistrusted, despised, and vilified. Nowadays is is more subtle. I urge you to do the exercise I outlined above.

Additionally, take a look at advertisements: Is there any reason to believe anything presented is Non-Prejudical rhetoric? Nope, it is almost all prejudical rhetoric...intended to make a persistent imprint about their product.

I think the same can be said of CNN and the rest of them as well.

Have things changed since you were a boy in the south. I don't think so.

To provide an example of non-prejudicial rhetoric, we can look at quotes from influential figures that aim to inspire without promoting bias or discrimination:

1. "The only way to do great work is to love what you do." - Steve Jobs
2. "In the end, it's not the years in your life that count. It's the life in your years." - Abraham Lincoln
3. "The greatest glory in living lies not in never falling, but in rising every time we fall." - Nelson Mandela

These statements promote positive values without targeting or prejudicing any particular group.

It is worth mentioning that evaluating the prevalence of prejudicial rhetoric in news channels or advertisements requires observation and analysis. One approach could involve recording a segment from a channel (such as Fox News) or evaluating advertisements and transcribing them. Then, by examining the content, identifying instances of prejudicial rhetoric, and rewriting those statements in a non-prejudicial manner, one can differentiate between the two types of rhetoric.

Regarding personal experiences and the perception of change over time, it is essential to approach it with caution. People's perspectives and circumstances may differ, and it is important to consider a wide range of factors when making judgments on societal progress.