Speech & Debate is one of the best platforms for high schoolers to find their voice and speak up for issues they care about, depending on who you ask. If you watch any round of NSDA finals, you’ll find a variety of topics that students speak passionately about. But what happens when that same advocacy that has shaped this activity becomes less about genuine change and more about getting ranks?

This has become an increasingly imperative conversation within the Speech & Debate space: false advocacy. False advocacy happens when a competitor chooses to speak on an issue without genuine understanding, respect, or responsibility for the message they are communicating. It is not simply telling a story that is different from your own experience; Speech & Debate is built on storytelling, and storytelling often requires us to step into perspectives different from our own. Instead, false advocacy occurs when a competitor uses an important issue as a tool for competitive success without taking the responsibility that comes with representing that issue.

This article will primarily focus on speech events, but this idea can also apply to other events..

Now, I want to preface this commentary by saying that false advocacy is not always done with malicious intent. Many students, especially with newer competitors, choose pieces because they connect with the narrative, even if they do not have a direct connection to the topic or experience being performed. They choose these pieces because the story moves them, not because they have personally lived through what the piece is about, and that is not a crime.

This is not so to say that a competitor needs to have experienced every situation they perform in to communicate it effectively. However, we do need to be careful about “speaking up” for communities and experiences that are not our own. Without taking the time to understand the intricacies of a topic, there is a risk of misrepresenting the experiences being discussed or unintentionally offending people who directly relate to those struggles.

The question is not whether someone is allowed to tell a story that is not their own. The question is whether they are representing that story responsibly.

Representation vs. Performing

There is a major difference between representing an experience and performing your own idea of what that experience is like.

True representation comes from understanding the issue at hand, respecting the people behind the story, researching the topic, and recognizing that you are dealing with something much bigger than a ten-minute performance.

Where that impact turns “performative”, however, is when a story becomes a means to an end. It happens when competitors choose a topic not because they want to represent it in a meaningful way, but because they believe it will create a stronger emotional reaction from a judge.

For example, when it comes to topics involving race, it is important to acknowledge the complexities of representing experiences that are not your own. Someone who has not personally experienced certain racial struggles may not fully understand every nuance behind those experiences. There are cultural, historical, and personal elements that cannot always be understood simply through research alone. This idea is not meant to gatekeep certain topics from competitors who do not share those experiences, but to make sure that we approach these topics in a respectful manner.

A competitor representing a community should not reduce their experiences into a simple message or use their struggles as an emotional shortcut. They should take the time to understand the people behind the story and recognize the complexity of the issue.

The issue is not that someone is telling an important story. The issue is when someone uses someone else's pain for their own purposes.

Sometimes topics are chosen because the competitor realizes that certain topics will immediately connect with the average judge and create a stronger reaction. Certain topics naturally carry more emotional weight, and because of that, they can sometimes become an advantage in a round.

While this does not guarantee better ranks, the issue is not the topic itself but the mindset behind choosing it.

When advocacy becomes a strategy instead of a genuine message, we start moving away from what makes Speech & Debate special in the first place.

Why This Matters

This is bigger than just one performance. It affects what Speech & Debate represents as an activity. So many students have found their voice and told their stories because of Speech & Debate. When competitors treat advocacy as a strategy instead of a responsibility, it can overshadow the purpose behind the stories being told.

It also brings out one of the more polarizing aspects of Speech & Debate: the pressure to be the best, the desire to stand out, and the constant pursuit of getting the 1. 

Competition is a huge part of Speech & Debate. Wanting to improve, win, and succeed is not a bad thing. However, when competitiveness reaches the point of misrepresenting stories or using important issues as a way to get ahead, that is when we lose sight of what this activity is supposed to be about. If competitive motives drive students to exploit the suffering, stories and narratives of other people for trophies, it can desensitize us to real world problems. 

This article is not meant to condemn every competitor who performs stories that are not strictly their own. It is not meant to say that people cannot tell stories outside of their personal experiences. Instead, this is a reminder that every story comes with responsibility.

Someone else’s story is not yours to use simply because it is easier, more emotional, or more likely to work in a round.

Our voices are powerful, but with that power comes responsibility. We need to choose topics where we give back to the communities whose stories we are telling by representing them, not take from them by using their experiences as a way to get ahead.

Moving Toward Authenticity

The solution is not creating a system where we question every competitor’s story. Realistically, we would never be able to fully verify how much someone can relate to their performance. Adopting a system or a mindset like that would create distrust and hurt the activity as a whole.

Instead, we as competitors need to value authenticity over rankings.

Coaches and communities should encourage students to choose pieces because they genuinely connect with the message, not simply because they believe the topic will perform well competitively.

A hard truth we need to accept within the Speech & Debate community is that not every story is meant to become your next performance piece. Some experiences carry so much context, pain, and history behind them that you may not be able to fully do them justice without experiencing them firsthand. And that’s okay.

There are still stories you can tell regardless of that, so don’t ever think that just because you don’t have a hot-button topic, you won’t be able to compete. Topics have never been the reason Speech & Debate is so important. It’s the weight of the voice behind those topics that makes them powerful.

Most importantly, competitors should ask themselves a simple question before choosing a piece:

Am I telling this story because I have something meaningful to contribute, or because I believe this story will help me win?

At its best, Speech & Debate is about connection. It is about sharing ideas, telling stories, and creating change through communication.

We need to encourage authenticity within the Speech & Debate community more than we celebrate performance.

Because the most impactful speeches are not the ones that simply get the biggest reaction.

They are the ones that feel real.