If you have ever send out a memo or given a presentation and then been able to hear the snide remarks or reinterpretations of it you know how it feels. We have all done it, so there is no one "without sin" to cast the first stone. Just the same, it makes it difficult to convey your message when others are allowed to recast it in a different light. Thanks to the great expanse of words that we have available to us and to the ease of employing sarcasm, it is not difficult to take almost any statement and abuse it. I think it is interesting that rarely do companies publicly mangle the messages of competitors. I believe that it partly stems from the public's general dislike of negative campaigns.
How do you control your message? How do you get people to hear what you mean and not only what you say?
1 Preparation - practice and refine what you want to convey
2 Substantiation - back it up with concise, clear, and curt reasons
3 Image - a diagram or picture makes the concept more difficult to distort
4 Repetition - Politicians are masters of this. Even if it not true they say it until it is believed
5 Tell the Truth- Many people can sense dishonesty or sincerity
The larger the group or organization you address, the greater the chance there will be someone who misinterprets, makes sarcastic remarks, or makes light of your message. In a business setting, this is a sign of an unhappy environment. Finding why this person chose to act in this way may be very important. Just as the one customer who complains represents a thousand who do not, the unhappy employee or team member may represent many other who do not have the courage, or lack of sense, to complain.
How do you improve the accuracy of your message delivery?
BTW - I think Hillary should have told the heckler that shouted, "Iron my shirt!" that she was more than able to and run for President but that he was probably not able to do either.
I'm not sure that a message getting hijacked is necessarily always a bad thing. I would rather that a few bad apples deliberately distorted, or good apples simply misunderstood and therefore misreported than no one noticed at all.
If someone is paying attention and feels what you have to say is worthy of comment, that's good, and people who are wrong-headed will often draw more attention to you than the other way around. If you get recognition, then the ball is back in your court and it's up to you to turn it to your advantage.
Funny you should use the example of Hilary though. The Clinton's and their coterie are absolute masters at picking out fragments to malign others and distort facts with abandon to suit their ends, and they don't care who they hurt along the way. So much so that I have zero trust in anything they say -- there is always a personal agenda in play -- and I think I will quite enjoy watching an equally matched opponent take it back to them.
Live by the sword, die by the sword, and few deserve it more.
By the way, it's also amusing how points 4 and 5 are often in conflict. You can repeat a lie ad nauseum, as most politicians (of all stripes) do, or tell the truth, but truthtellers often don't realize that their message needs repeating. The liars know theirs does. That's why liars usually win.
Posted by: Paul | January 22, 2008 10:28 AM | Permalink to Comment