Final answer:
Vatz counters Bitzer's claim that the situation controls the rhetorical response. Vatz believes that the rhetor's choices and framing of the situation influence the persuasive message. The situation itself does not have inherent persuasive power according to Vatz.
Step-by-step explanation:
Bitzer argues that the rhetorical response is controlled by the situation, while Vatz counters this claim. Vatz believes that the situation does not have inherent persuasive power but rather it is the rhetor who selects and frames the situation in order to create a persuasive message. According to Vatz, the rhetor's choices about what to include or exclude from the situation significantly impact the rhetorical response.
For example, let's say there is a political debate about tax policy. Bitzer would argue that the situation itself, such as economic data, would determine the rhetorical response. However, Vatz would argue that the candidate can select different facts and statistics, use emotional appeals, or frame the situation in a particular way to shape the rhetorical response of the audience.
In summary, Vatz rejects Bitzer's idea that the situation controls the rhetorical response. Instead, Vatz emphasizes the agency of the rhetor in influencing the audience's response through careful choice and framing of the situation.