Presentation rhetoric of a complex issue can potentially affect the message impact on the receivers. This study reports the results from a quasi-experimental study that compares the differential impact on viewers of two rhetorically contrasting videos on the current American Healthcare Reform debate. Both the videos share almost identical narratives by the same presenter. Video 1 simulates realistic, face-to-face communication while Video 2 presents the discussion using entirely computer-generated multimedia. Using Elaboration Likelihood model and entertainment-education theories, this study suggests that perceivably objective messages which include a combination of text, imagery, and sound tend to arouse and involve its viewers more and, thereby, may garner more impact and behavioral change on a viewer than presentations which lack these qualities.