Counting today, the 2008 presidential campaign will be over in five days. Because of its many historical highlights, it is a race that will be written about for years to come. And rightfully so. The interesting thing is: with all the books, think pieces, magazine articles, etc. to follow, the actual results of the race will not necessarily be the primary focus of all that will be written and spoken. America has made history in 2007 and 2008 no matter who ultimately captures the brass ring. This has been an exciting time for our nation. As I write this I am hoping that Americans, by the end of the day on Tuesday, November 4, will have done the right thing.
What, you might wonder, do I mean by "the right thing?" First, let me preface my explanation by observing that over the past nearly two years of this campaign, there have been times when Americans, including the candidates and their many representatives, have not done the right thing. Purposely spreading misleading information is not the right thing. The claim from the McCain camp that Obama supports sex education for preschool kids is an example. The claim from the Obama camp that McCain does not appreciate the economic hardships being faced today by many Americans is an example. Cries from some McCain supporters that Obama should be killed is an example. Cries from some Obama supp0rters that McCain actually betrayed the nation during his years as a POW in Vietnam is an example. They as candidates and we as people are better than that.
Whenever I reflect on the vision of America's Founding Fathers, the famous motto of Dumas' "The Three Musketeers" almost always come to mind: "all for one and one for all." It is this principle on which our nation was founded and our constitution was drawn. The best moments in our nation's history have always been when we as a people have worked together for the common good. Think of Lincoln's famous "house divided" speech. He captured that sentiment better than anyone. Unity comes from honesty, not misleading statements and actions. The past years have demonstrated that. Let election day this year be a giant step for all of us to reclaim our nation's heritage.
One theme in the postings I have thus far made is that communication is at its most effective when it is done honestly. On election day this year, I hope Americans do the right thing by voting honestly; by voting for a person and what he represents for our nation as opposed to supporting lies and unfounded fears and bigotry and ignorance. The two candidates are good men. We are a good nation. On election day I call for that innate goodness to step forward and be heard.
Friday, October 31, 2008
Tuesday, October 28, 2008
Handling a Crisis
There has been a lot of talk lately in the presidential campaign about handling a crisis. Which candidate has been tested? Which one has "the spine of steel" to deal with the unknown and unwanted emergency? Will the United States be at greater risk if one candidate is selected over another? These are all pertinent questions because of the simple fact we all want to be safe and feel as if our government and our leaders not only have our best interests at heart, but also are looking out for us in good times and bad. In the past nearly eight years, some bad things have occurred inside our borders. We have been attacked by terrorists, had a valuable region of the country destroyed by a hurricane, and seen pockets of our infrastructure collapse. How have our leaders handled these rocky events? Have they done so in a way that instills confidence? God forbid, nothing like these will ever happen again, but if it does, then which of our candidates do we want to have in the position of leading us through them?
One of the essential ingredients in handling a crisis is communication. Above all else, people want one very basic thing when something terrible occurs: information. Specifically, they want to know what has happened, what is being done about it, and what steps are being taken to help ensure it never happens again. Additionally, they also want honesty, accountability and compassion. People also want to be communicated with in a manner in which they understand and in ways we can be inspired to take actions or steps to help be part of the response to a crisis. If the communicator in charge falls short on these fundamental expectations, then the effectiveness of their communication efforts will in all likelihood be compromised.
I have purposely not mentioned either presidential candidate in the context of this entry. My purpose is not to endorse one candidate over the other as being the best communicator in times of a crisis, but rather to raise some specific questions as to which one do we feel is best suited to serve as our primary source of information should our nation be hit with a future crisis. Communication will not solve a crisis, but any solution to a crisis cannot be carried out unless effective communication is part of the mix.
One of the essential ingredients in handling a crisis is communication. Above all else, people want one very basic thing when something terrible occurs: information. Specifically, they want to know what has happened, what is being done about it, and what steps are being taken to help ensure it never happens again. Additionally, they also want honesty, accountability and compassion. People also want to be communicated with in a manner in which they understand and in ways we can be inspired to take actions or steps to help be part of the response to a crisis. If the communicator in charge falls short on these fundamental expectations, then the effectiveness of their communication efforts will in all likelihood be compromised.
I have purposely not mentioned either presidential candidate in the context of this entry. My purpose is not to endorse one candidate over the other as being the best communicator in times of a crisis, but rather to raise some specific questions as to which one do we feel is best suited to serve as our primary source of information should our nation be hit with a future crisis. Communication will not solve a crisis, but any solution to a crisis cannot be carried out unless effective communication is part of the mix.
Friday, October 24, 2008
Tortoise and the Hare
We all remember the lesson of the fable, The Tortoise and the Hare: "slow and steady wins the race." Communication is much like that - a long distance run rather than a sprint. One of the ingredients of effective communication is consistency of message. Establishing that only comes with time. It involves reiteration, giving explanation to, and building on core ideas and values. These things can not be done in one media event or one splashy moment. Do not get me wrong. I like splashy moments as much as the next guy. But, for me, unless that splashy moment is reinforced the next day or shortly afterward with complementary behavior and/or words, then that splashy moment is rendered hollow and meaningless.
When it comes to effective communication, one should also be wary of first impressions. Let us say we meet or hear someone and are immediately impressed. That is great. But if the next time we encounter this same person they are contradicting themselves in word or deed, then that first impression becomes suspect. There is an old saying in baseball circles that a player should not be judged by how they play in one game. Truer words have never been spoken, particularly as they apply to communication. No one hits a home run in every game they play. Nor do they commit three errors in every game either. But watch that same player on the field in, say, 10 to 12 games and you have a much more rounded and accurate perspective of their abilities. The same holds true for someone in what they say and do.
People who give great speeches are to be applauded. People who make good first impressions are to be envied. But what that person is like the next day or the day after in terms of their behavior and words? Whether it is in politics or our own day-to-day encounters with others, my advice is to look for the tortoise in that person rather than the hare.
When it comes to effective communication, one should also be wary of first impressions. Let us say we meet or hear someone and are immediately impressed. That is great. But if the next time we encounter this same person they are contradicting themselves in word or deed, then that first impression becomes suspect. There is an old saying in baseball circles that a player should not be judged by how they play in one game. Truer words have never been spoken, particularly as they apply to communication. No one hits a home run in every game they play. Nor do they commit three errors in every game either. But watch that same player on the field in, say, 10 to 12 games and you have a much more rounded and accurate perspective of their abilities. The same holds true for someone in what they say and do.
People who give great speeches are to be applauded. People who make good first impressions are to be envied. But what that person is like the next day or the day after in terms of their behavior and words? Whether it is in politics or our own day-to-day encounters with others, my advice is to look for the tortoise in that person rather than the hare.
Tuesday, October 21, 2008
The Right Words
Words are such elusive and tricky things. It seems like the time you need them the most is also the time when they are the most difficult to find. Maybe I'm just speaking for myself in that regard. No doubt, we all have found ourselves in situations from time to time when we are flustered and/or tongue-tied. Yet there do seem to be those who get less stymied than others. What is their secret? How do they do it? I wish I knew exactly because many of the people I tend to admire the most are those who seem to have a great talent for pulling the right word out of the air that captures the moment, makes it meaningful, pinpoints feelings that ache to be expressed, and are able to lift interaction to a new level.
One thing I do know is that among the people who are good with words are those who are students of words, respecters of language. I'm talking about people who read, people who value connecting with others; people who think in terms of inclusiveness rather than exclusivity. Why these people? It is because these people know words do count. Words provide the foundation on which actions are taken, attitudes are formulated, images are fostered, and ties are bound. Do not take my word for it. Think of a great love song that holds special meaning. Think of a simple statement from a child who whispers, "I love you." Think of Lincoln's address at Gettysburg. Think of FDR's fireside chats. It is all about the words.
Presently, our nation is facing a great many problems that, collectively, seem insurmountable. Fortunately, they are not. However, it is going to take a great deal of sacrifice and wise action to address them. But before any of that happens, it will also take words. They will need to be clear, precise, heartfelt, well conceived, and honest. As we move closer to the next presidential election, one criteria for whom we vote should be which candidate is most apt to deliver words of that caliber.
One thing I do know is that among the people who are good with words are those who are students of words, respecters of language. I'm talking about people who read, people who value connecting with others; people who think in terms of inclusiveness rather than exclusivity. Why these people? It is because these people know words do count. Words provide the foundation on which actions are taken, attitudes are formulated, images are fostered, and ties are bound. Do not take my word for it. Think of a great love song that holds special meaning. Think of a simple statement from a child who whispers, "I love you." Think of Lincoln's address at Gettysburg. Think of FDR's fireside chats. It is all about the words.
Presently, our nation is facing a great many problems that, collectively, seem insurmountable. Fortunately, they are not. However, it is going to take a great deal of sacrifice and wise action to address them. But before any of that happens, it will also take words. They will need to be clear, precise, heartfelt, well conceived, and honest. As we move closer to the next presidential election, one criteria for whom we vote should be which candidate is most apt to deliver words of that caliber.
Friday, October 17, 2008
Our Inner Communicator
Have you ever just left a meeting or encounter with someone feeling frustrated with yourself because you either did not say all the things you really wanted to say or you are unhappy with what you actually did say? I have. Sometimes I will even replay these episodes in my head except I will alter the dialogue - mine mostly - to where I emerge feeling triumphant, validated, vindicated, better understood, better appreciated, etc. While those little trips down fantasy lane do feel good, they do not erase the reality that I did not - and do not- always communicate as well as I would like. Why not?
There are, of course, many reasons why any of us do not think as quickly or articulately on our fee as we would like. Some are more forgivable than others. For instance, we all get flustered, nervous, surprised, emotional, etc. at times to the point where we are not given enough time to adequately digest information that is being shared with us. There are times, however, when even though we are not caught off guard, we still get flustered or "tongue-tied," speak clumsily, or fail to express everything we need or want to say. Again, why?
My contention is that all of have an inner-communicator that we do not listen to as much as we should. Much like our body communicates with us when something is physically wrong, so, too, our inner communicator provides us with guidance on how we should be respond in various situations. Our challenge is to listen when that voice speaks and give its guidance serious thought. This is not always as easy as we might think because doing this takes discipline. Are any of us as disciplined as much as we might like? I am not. But I am working on it so those little fantasy trips I take from time to time can be replaced with replays of what really happened.
There are, of course, many reasons why any of us do not think as quickly or articulately on our fee as we would like. Some are more forgivable than others. For instance, we all get flustered, nervous, surprised, emotional, etc. at times to the point where we are not given enough time to adequately digest information that is being shared with us. There are times, however, when even though we are not caught off guard, we still get flustered or "tongue-tied," speak clumsily, or fail to express everything we need or want to say. Again, why?
My contention is that all of have an inner-communicator that we do not listen to as much as we should. Much like our body communicates with us when something is physically wrong, so, too, our inner communicator provides us with guidance on how we should be respond in various situations. Our challenge is to listen when that voice speaks and give its guidance serious thought. This is not always as easy as we might think because doing this takes discipline. Are any of us as disciplined as much as we might like? I am not. But I am working on it so those little fantasy trips I take from time to time can be replaced with replays of what really happened.
Monday, October 13, 2008
Consistency of Message
No one communicates perfectly all the time. We either misspeak or fail to speak in a way that our intended can understand. The matter that the person or persons to whom we are speaking may not be listening to what it is we are saying is another glitch that gets in the way of perfect communicating. One way to help improve the odds that your efforts to communicate are successful is to send out your message in multiple ways. The multiple strategies, if timed well, can also reinforce each other and make your message even more effective.
Potential problems can be if one either does not use multiple strategies or, if they do, fails to ensure that their multiple messages are in sync and not contradictory. Making a romantic dinner date, for instance, is certainly a powerful way of communicating one's feelings toward another. But, then, if you show up for that date either late or drunk or both, then the message you are giving by your behavior contradicts the message you communicated when you made the date in the first place. The key is to be consistent in what you say and do. When one veers away from that simple rule, their credibility is compromised and, before you know it, your ability to communicate at all in a meaningful way is either lost or seriously damaged.
Given the political climate within our nation these days, the question of how well and how consistently the top candidates are in their outreach efforts. As I write this, Senator Obama is leading the polls and, if anything, seems to be building on that lead. What role is his ability to communicate consistently playing in this? On the flip side, Senator McCain's campaign is foundering. Could the fact that the messages he has been communicating have been erratic and inconsistent be one of the reasons for the state of his campaign? Definitely yes. One is consistent in message and one is not. One is enjoying a groundswell of support while the other is not. Obviously there are other factors that are contributing to the ups and downs of this year's presidential race, but none are more fundamental than their ability to communicate with consistent messages.
Potential problems can be if one either does not use multiple strategies or, if they do, fails to ensure that their multiple messages are in sync and not contradictory. Making a romantic dinner date, for instance, is certainly a powerful way of communicating one's feelings toward another. But, then, if you show up for that date either late or drunk or both, then the message you are giving by your behavior contradicts the message you communicated when you made the date in the first place. The key is to be consistent in what you say and do. When one veers away from that simple rule, their credibility is compromised and, before you know it, your ability to communicate at all in a meaningful way is either lost or seriously damaged.
Given the political climate within our nation these days, the question of how well and how consistently the top candidates are in their outreach efforts. As I write this, Senator Obama is leading the polls and, if anything, seems to be building on that lead. What role is his ability to communicate consistently playing in this? On the flip side, Senator McCain's campaign is foundering. Could the fact that the messages he has been communicating have been erratic and inconsistent be one of the reasons for the state of his campaign? Definitely yes. One is consistent in message and one is not. One is enjoying a groundswell of support while the other is not. Obviously there are other factors that are contributing to the ups and downs of this year's presidential race, but none are more fundamental than their ability to communicate with consistent messages.
Friday, October 10, 2008
Responsible Communication
Being able to communicate well is a gift. Whether it comes naturally or with practice and coaching, to be able to connect with an audience in person, in writing, on camera or with your voice on radio, is no small thing. You talk and people actually listen to what you say and how you say it. They are moved. Your words cause them to rethink their own lives, ideas, and perspectives. Perhaps they are even persuaded to take action. In our day-to-day lives, how often does this happen? At least for me, not often.
Yet there are those who do communicate in a manner that is movingly convincing. As listeners we are touched. Perhaps this happens because of the communicator's wealth of knowledge, the circumstances under which they are communicating, or because of the position the communicator holds that causes listeners to sit up and take note. A connection occurs and for that time, the communicator is in a position of power because they are holding sway over those who are listening to them. For the communicator, of course, this is a nice position in which to be. This position, however, does not come free. To paraphrase a line from any one of the movies featuring Spiderman - or was it one of the ones with Superman? - with great power comes great responsibility.
Any time a person is given or has power thrust upon them, they are saddled with the choice of what to do with it: Do good? Bring out the best in those to whom you are communicating? Mislead? Manipulate listeners to suit your own agenda? The choices are many. The responsibility is all-consuming. I look at the many campaign speeches being given these days by our presidential and vice presidential candidates and wonder how responsible they are being with their gift to communicate well. When those to whom you are speaking are moved to scream chants of "kill 'em" and "traitor" about other candidates, then the communicator is not being responsible at all. They are using their gifts for all the wrong reasons and need to be rejected. If a person abuses such a fundamental gift as communication, then can they trusted in any other part of their lives such as political office?
Yet there are those who do communicate in a manner that is movingly convincing. As listeners we are touched. Perhaps this happens because of the communicator's wealth of knowledge, the circumstances under which they are communicating, or because of the position the communicator holds that causes listeners to sit up and take note. A connection occurs and for that time, the communicator is in a position of power because they are holding sway over those who are listening to them. For the communicator, of course, this is a nice position in which to be. This position, however, does not come free. To paraphrase a line from any one of the movies featuring Spiderman - or was it one of the ones with Superman? - with great power comes great responsibility.
Any time a person is given or has power thrust upon them, they are saddled with the choice of what to do with it: Do good? Bring out the best in those to whom you are communicating? Mislead? Manipulate listeners to suit your own agenda? The choices are many. The responsibility is all-consuming. I look at the many campaign speeches being given these days by our presidential and vice presidential candidates and wonder how responsible they are being with their gift to communicate well. When those to whom you are speaking are moved to scream chants of "kill 'em" and "traitor" about other candidates, then the communicator is not being responsible at all. They are using their gifts for all the wrong reasons and need to be rejected. If a person abuses such a fundamental gift as communication, then can they trusted in any other part of their lives such as political office?
Tuesday, October 7, 2008
Making Choices
People choose to communicate the way they do. People choose to be direct or evasive; up front or underhanded; truthful or deceptive; insulting or kind. (I was going to include "serious or funny" in that list but from my first-hand experience I know people can try to be funny, yet end be taken seriously or, even worse, not funny.) The national debates and day-to-day speech making currently underway are a case in point. As has been feared, given the history of the last few presidential campaigns in particular, things are beginning to get nasty. Charges of being unpatriotic,dishonest, and corrupt are being tossed about with as much zing as a tennis ball in the final set of Wimbledon.
Arguably, presidential elections should bring out the best in all of us, including the candidates. President of the United States is the most powerful position in the world and deserves more than people who are willing to lie and mislead their way into it. Does any one doubt that we the people deserve more than that, too? Yet in campaign after campaign we seem to accept less-than-decent behavior of candidates and, in some cases, support it. Why do we do that? As ones who are on the receiving end of the messages being sent to us, we need to be more strict in our assessment of those who seek to represent us on the national and international scene.
Constantly, the hope is stated that our nation needs another Lincoln or Washington at its helm. Yet when is the last time we demanded that candidates possess the qualities that we attribute to those two former giants in American history? Looking back at American television, it was once observed that programmers do not give people what they want. Instead people accept what is given them. Perhaps we the people should begin communicating the candidates we really wantas opposed to accepting those who step out behind the curtain each election cycle.
Arguably, presidential elections should bring out the best in all of us, including the candidates. President of the United States is the most powerful position in the world and deserves more than people who are willing to lie and mislead their way into it. Does any one doubt that we the people deserve more than that, too? Yet in campaign after campaign we seem to accept less-than-decent behavior of candidates and, in some cases, support it. Why do we do that? As ones who are on the receiving end of the messages being sent to us, we need to be more strict in our assessment of those who seek to represent us on the national and international scene.
Constantly, the hope is stated that our nation needs another Lincoln or Washington at its helm. Yet when is the last time we demanded that candidates possess the qualities that we attribute to those two former giants in American history? Looking back at American television, it was once observed that programmers do not give people what they want. Instead people accept what is given them. Perhaps we the people should begin communicating the candidates we really wantas opposed to accepting those who step out behind the curtain each election cycle.
Thursday, October 2, 2008
Spin
I have worked in the communications field now for over 35 years, first as a journalist and currently as a press secretary. Over the past few years one term has emerged regarding this profession that really bugs me: spin. Especially as applied to public relations and, more specifically, people like me, it suggests purposeful dishonesty; a twisting of facts; a manipulation of information for the purpose of deceiving. Mainly, I am bothered for two reasons. The first is it suggests public relations practitioners professionals are fundamentally dishonest individuals who are paid to lie and "pull a fast one" on their audiences. The second reason is, sadly, because there are too many instances when that perception is true.
At the risk of generalizing, professional communicators are honest workers who are unfairly maligned. Often times these people are hired to represent one side of an issue or an individual, such as a political candidate. They gather facts. The devise strategies to communicate those facts.They generate plans to present their clients in the best possible light. Those activities, in themselves, are not bad things. Lawyers do the same thing for their clients. Unfortunately, it is not uncommon for people to confuse a communicator's vigorous support of a person or an issue as being manipulative or dishonest because they are not presenting a complete picture of an issue. It is important to remember that it is the public relations professional's job to present one side, not both sides, as a journalist is supposed to do.
At the same time, there are professional communicators who do lie, twist the truth, and deceive. They give the field of public relations a bad name because they label themselves communicators. The truth is these "spinners" are not communicators, but in fact are bald-faced liars. These kind of individuals are found in every profession. Sadly, as it is in many walks of life, good liars are often hard to detect and expose. Sometimes they can even get away with deceiving or spinning for years. The run-up to the war in Iraq is a good example. The fact the Bush administration has virtually no credibility right now is one result of the well orchestrated spinning its key players initiated nearly seven years ago. What they did was not public relations. It was being dishonest.
I will be writing more on the work of public relations practitioners and the work they do. Make no mistake, ones that are good and reputable are not dishonest. They are just doing their job.
At the risk of generalizing, professional communicators are honest workers who are unfairly maligned. Often times these people are hired to represent one side of an issue or an individual, such as a political candidate. They gather facts. The devise strategies to communicate those facts.They generate plans to present their clients in the best possible light. Those activities, in themselves, are not bad things. Lawyers do the same thing for their clients. Unfortunately, it is not uncommon for people to confuse a communicator's vigorous support of a person or an issue as being manipulative or dishonest because they are not presenting a complete picture of an issue. It is important to remember that it is the public relations professional's job to present one side, not both sides, as a journalist is supposed to do.
At the same time, there are professional communicators who do lie, twist the truth, and deceive. They give the field of public relations a bad name because they label themselves communicators. The truth is these "spinners" are not communicators, but in fact are bald-faced liars. These kind of individuals are found in every profession. Sadly, as it is in many walks of life, good liars are often hard to detect and expose. Sometimes they can even get away with deceiving or spinning for years. The run-up to the war in Iraq is a good example. The fact the Bush administration has virtually no credibility right now is one result of the well orchestrated spinning its key players initiated nearly seven years ago. What they did was not public relations. It was being dishonest.
I will be writing more on the work of public relations practitioners and the work they do. Make no mistake, ones that are good and reputable are not dishonest. They are just doing their job.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)