Hot Button Issues

I think most, if not all of us, have issues about which we feel great passion. When we speak about these topics we find ourselves getting animated and perhaps raising our voices. People around us might interpret our actions as our being angry or upset. That is not alway the case. As emotional beings, we tend to get excited from time to time and not always because we are angry. But there are times, of course, when we raise our voices over an issue because it does make us angry. Anger takes over our normal way of behaving and speaking. Before we know it, we are either lashing out at those around us or inciting the same type of behavior in others - either because they agree with us or because they feel we are unfairly attacking them. Then, almost without warning, we are engaged in a yelling match with another person.

Such an unfortunate scene has happened to all of us. It certainly has to me. When it does, I always walk away wishing I had a done a better job of keeping my cool. I have no problem with being passionate about an issue, but even being emotional about something is no excuse for coming across as verbally attacking another person. Beside being rude, it never leads to agreement over the issue that triggered the raised voices in the first place. This is why when it comes to hot button issues, I urge caution. While I do not believe they should be avoided, I do feel they need to be approached with the greatest respect. If we approach one without being prepared, then they can and often do bring out the worst in us.

In terms of communication, there is nothing worse than people who are interacting with no intention of being respectful or seeking any kind of civil understanding. That contributes nothing to the topic and, without question, harms how we are perceived. It is okay to be passionate about an issue. It is even ok to raise one's voice when talking about it - if that happens. But impeding communication is not ok. Interacting with another person while having no intention of listening to them is not ok either. Communication is about engagement. Good communication is an act of respect and civility. Hot button issues can be opportunities to bring out the best in ourselves.

The Sad Truth of Campaigns

Is there any one who is not aware a presidiential election will be happening later in 2012? I think not. Even though the conventions for both of the major political parties have not yet happened, we already know who their candidates will be. Both are in campaign mode. They and their surrogates are out giving tons of speeches, interviews with the media, and generally doing all they can  to connect with potential voters and effectively communicate their positions on a range of issues. This, of course, is our nation's political process and this is how we choose our leaders. From a communication standpoint, I find it represents the both the best and worst of us.

I say the best because the candidates are so visible and, generally, doing what they can to interact with their supporters as well as those who have not yet made up their minds about them. To different degrees the voters are able to talk with the candidates, ask questions, and get a sense of them as people and leaders. Granted, as there are only two of them and millions of us, the kind of interaction that occurs is rarely far from ideal. At best, it is superficial and closely choreographed so any genuine interaction the candidates do with voters is rare. As frustrating as that is, it not the worst part of our political process as it relates to communication.  

The worst part is that the eventual decision of the voters is based on which candidate makes the best case for him or herself, not necessarily on which one is the truth teller. Honesty does not always win the day on election day. It seems as if almost daily one or both of the candidates shade or ignore the truth when speaking or communicating to the public. It has gotten to a point where a number of major media outlets have even created what they call fact check or a Pinochio test columns in which they identify the falsehoods or misleading statements the two sides put forth the day before. How sad is that? It has even gotten to a point where I wonder if voters are even able to identify the truth when they hear or read it. That reality is way beyond sad.

Speech Writing Truisms

Speech writing is an important craft to master. Even though  it may not always seem like it, particularly these days, there are those who do have important things to share with audiences. But often because they are busy or perhaps not as good in organizing their thoughts as they might like to be, they need writers to help compose remarks that reflect their vision in a way in which people can readily understand and relate. This leads me to several important speech wriing truisms that speech writers should take to heart if they are going to be as good as they need and should be.

Speech writing is about the speech maker, not the speech writer. As it is they who are standing at the rostrum or in front of a microphone, words coming out of their mouth should reflect their perspective, opinion, and/or vision. In order to learn what those points of view are, then the speech writer must spend time with the speech writer. Get to know him or her. What are their likes or dislikes? What motivates them? What kind of background did they have? What is their personal and professional history? Who do they admire? These are the kind of basic questions that should help the writer get a deeper sense of who it is they are writing for.Without this kind of fundamental knowledge, then it is hard to establish any degree of authenticity in a speech.

An important word of caution: any thoughts the writer might have that they are the puppet master and the speech maker is the pupplet should be dispelled immediately. Respect the speech maker and the process. The challenge of the writer is to produce words that best match and/or showcase the speech maker's thoughts/vision. The speech writer is not the candidate or the CEO or the official everyone has come to hear. The speech maker is. Without question, speech writers are important part of the communication process, but their role is one of support. Always remember that. Should the roles ever be reversed, then the speech writer would want nothing less from their speech writer.

Rodney King

It was March, 1991, when Rodney King became a household name in America. Following a high-speed chase with Los Angeles police, King, who died recently, was finally apprehended. As video footage later showed, King was pulled out of his car and then struck over 50 times by the officers using their clubs and night sticks. The officers were later arrested on police brutality-related charges. Their trial was highly controversial  as the officers were acquitted. This set in motion the Los Angeles riots in which 53 people ended up dieing and millions of dollars in vandalism occurred in response to what many felt was the unjust ruling of the court.

It was during this time when King uttered his now-famous question: "Can't we all just get along?" Indeed. The question is as appropriate today as it was then.While I am sure we can get along; that is, we have the ability to do so, I wonder more and more if we really want to. The United States Congress is a perfect case-in-point. For over three years now these men and women have been circling each other, trading insults and seeming to go out of their way to do anything but work together to address problems they all agree our nation faces. Collegiality is not their goal. For the Democrats and Republicans, what is most important is seeking power at the expense of each other.

Effective communication is extremely difficult when people are hell-bent on not getting along. While I am convinced this type of self-inflicted roadblock will not last forever, I do not see it changing any time soon. I only wish I knew what it is going to take to reverse this ugly and destructive trend. Unfortunately, at present far too many Senators and Congressmen are blinded by their own ideology.  The best part of effective communication is that it is driven by a deep commitment to cooperation. People of different beliefs, perspectives and backgrounds come together to work toward a common good. This is not happening now. Sadly, Rodney King's simple yet profound question remains unanswered.

Plain Talk and Plain Action

In the fall of 2010, the federal government took a step designed to enhance communication for the entire nation. Instead of using language viewed as being confusing, convoluted and difficult to read, the government initiated a corrective measure. This action came in the form of passage of the Plain Writing Act, which requires federal agencies to start writing plainly in all publications produced for the public. That means instead of using phrases like "it is requested," the government will simply say "please." Instead of saying "it is required," the government will now say "you must." This legislation is largely due to the efforts of Annetta Cheek, a leader in the the plain language movement and current director of the Center for Plain Language.  

I am all for most anything that helps people communicate more easily and effectively. And if this legislation, now over a year old, does that, then great, particularly as it applies to improving interaction between federal agencies and the general population. For over a decade now, that relationship has been suffering. In fact, the American public's general opinion of government at present is at all-time low. Granted, that reality is because of the well-earned perception that elected officials do little any more but argue, name-call and point figures at each other.  But another key factor is due to their inability and unwillingness to adequately communicate with each other and with their constituents.

In order to truly connect with the public, then government officials - and this includes all elected to the executive and legislation branches - need to move beyond talking plain and turn their outreach into tangible and meaningful actions. As Eliza Doolittle sang in "My Fair Lady," "Show me!" Talking, plain or otherwise, is good, but what gives words weight are actions. Granted, communicating is not always easy, particularly when it is with people with whom you disagree or perhaps do not even like. But too much is at stake for any of us to be content with plain talking.

The Telegraph

Communicators owe a great debt to Samuel F. B.Morse. When Morris invented the telegraph in 1838, he introduced a communication tool that proved to be a major force in bringing people together, making the world smaller, and enabling news and information to be shared with more people at a faster rate than ever before. The telegraph was revolutionary and Morse is the guy we have to thank for it. In our current world of the Internet, Facebook, twitter, blogging, etc., there may be a tendency to minimize the significance of the telegraph. Compared to our modern technologies, the telegraph may seem quaint at best. Still, it is my hope it is never viewed in this manner.

In the years following the Civil War, the United States experienced a great economic boom. Businesses at the helm of many of the great corporate titans in our nation's history, including John D. Rockefeller, Sr., Andrew Carnegie, Cornelius Vanderbilt, J. P. Morgan  and others, were able to spread their innovative spirit and financial outreach across the United States. They created employment opportunities and served as proponents of the American dream. This expansion was due in no small measure to the telegraph. In fact, it was the telegraph that represented the first rung in the creation of America's national communication infrastructure.

2013 will mark the 175th birthday of the telegraph. That milestone needs to be recognized. It brought our country closer together by providing us with the ability to communicate like never before.  Thirty-eight years after the telegraph, Alexander Graham Bell invented the telephone, an innovation equally as revolutionary as the telegraph. But with all due respect to Bell, I consider the telephone to be an off-spring of the telegraph. The telegraph was the original connector. It was the original bridge that began connecting our nation and its great diversity in ways unheard of till then. It unleashed a flow of information exchange that continues to this day.

Animal Farm Comes to American Politics

Many people have read the famous novel, "Animal Farm." And many who haven't are nevertheless familiar with perhaps the main tag line of the story: everyone is equal but some are more equal than others. I have a deep concern this is what is happening in our country as it applies to free speech. The U.S. Supreme Court's 5 to 4 decision in 2010 in what is commonly known as the Citizens United case unleashed a dangerously unhealthy trend in our political system. The Supreme Court ruled that corporations have the right to spend as much money as they want - without prohibitions - in supporting or working against candidates.

Thus, in both essence and reality, corporations, in the eyes of the law, now have the same free speech protections as people despite the obvious fact corporations are not people. But as corporations have much money than individuals, they are in much stronger positions to assist candidates than people ever can or will. The playing field, as it were, is no longer even. I raise this point now because of the recent recall election in Wisconsin in which Governor Scott Walker was able to hang onto his job largely as a result of the multiple millions of dollars given to his campaign effort from many out-of-state millionaires and  billionaires and their corporations.

As I write this, the same thing is happening in the Presidential campaign between President Obama and his opponent, Mitt Romney, and in house and senate races throughout the country.  Even though in the case of Wisconsin and the other races the great majority of the million dollar support is on behalf of the conservative candidates, this is not as important as the fact the voice of the individual has been reduced to second tier status. From a communication perspective, such a reality creates a serious imbalance in the fundamental relationship between the individual voter and the individual candidate. The fact there are now various levels of individual voters poisons our democracy.  

Reflections on Self Presentation

I confess I struggle with self presentation. Talking about myself with others and even writing about myself for others to see is not something I have ever felt comfortable with. While I know I am not alone in that sentiment, I can also see in this era of social media that there are plainly many many others who enjoy it. Facebook and Twitter, of course, are great venues for people who do not mind in the least sharing what they did over the past weekend, talking about how cute their pet cat is, or giving their opinion on items in the news. These are forms of communication and I am all for that. In no way do I criticize people who do this.

I sometimes wonder, though, about the motives of people who do this. Is it to connect with others? Is it to make themselves feel not-so-anonymous? Is it to gain a sense of empowerment? Is it to gain a sense of belonging by entering into a unique technology-driven world of safe outreach? Whether a person is introvert or extrovert, comfortable with others or not, the cyber world attracts all kinds of people for all kinds of reasons. One aspect of it that I find fascinating is the fact that so much of the online interaction occurs between people who already know each other. Why not pick up the phone? Better yet, why not get together?

Overall, of course, it all seems to be working just fine. Yes, there are sad and tragic exceptions, but given the millions of acts of self presentation that occur every day, this is not surprising. (Given the number of gun owners in the world, it is also not surprising that some people die as a result of getting shot accidentally.) But I am not totally immune from the desire to self-present. With this particular writing, for example, I now have made over 400 entries in my blog. We are all social beings and, as a result, have a need to connect with others, a need to belong to environments beyond our own. The challenges is to do it in a way that is most meaningful to ourselves and to others.  

A Better Form of Communication

I marvel at all the communicating that dominates our culture these days. Between television, the cable stations, radio, print media, and, of course, the Internet, the amount of verbage, opinions and information all of us are subjected to every day is almost unimaginable. Having said that, I think this is a good thing because even though it may seem or feel like too much, this kind of overflow helps keep us our society free and gives us the opportunity to be enlightened and informed. If anythning, I would love seeing that opportunity expand. Given our continuing advancements in technology, it no doubt will in the coming months and years.

What troubles me, howevrer, is that a growing amount of that so-called communicating is bogus. By that I mean it is communication in the form of people simply talking at rather than talking with others. (Please know I am totally aware of the irony of that statement given the fact I maintain this blog in which usually two times per week I give my opinion on something. relating to comunication. But also know I write this blog with the hope and dream that it will trigger informative and stimulating interactions with others.) There is nothing wrong with people making known their opinion or perspective on any given topic. Ideally, though, this kind of sharing should be done in a manner that encourages exchange rather than seeks to drown it out.

Perhaps this one-way communicating that does comprise our current culture is part of our DNA. Over 200 years ago in our nation's struggle for independence, our Founding Fathers and other early patriots rode on the wings of one-way communication. The early rebels, who constituted a minority of the people living in the American colonies, began making noise - one-way noise - about how repressive "the mother country" was to all of them. Slowly but steadily that minoirty became a majority and, as we all know, after much blood shed led our nation to gaining independence. My concern is that in order to maintain the independence that so many fought and died for hundreds of years ago, we need to being doing more to encourage respectiful and active exchange. All forms of honest and rspectful communication are fine, Some are more effective than others. It is those that that I wish to see.