| « Darwin and me | Is evolution a one way street? » |
Communication is a good thing and how to do it?
Link: http://joanking.gamountains.net
Joan King's delightful column in yesterday's Gainesville Times has been on my mind since first reading. She makes many points worth pausing to consider. I take the main thrust to be communication among humans is serious business, at least in the past, being considered worthy of scholarly study and education.
I leave to the reader to make his or her interpretation of Ms. King's interesting commentary. I take that as a jumping off point for expressing some of my own thinking it has inspired.
We just need to slow down and consider the impact on the other as well as to try to determine if the other is hearing. That associated to Ariana Huffington's book selection, In Praise of Slowness and the wry appreciation that at my age there is no other option. The synapses just don't snap the way they once did.
As in my piece Pingback, whether as emotional tone or in words, response from the other is in my view a vital aspect to the good of communication. In other words, we must pause to listen and to feel. When strong emotions are aroused the listening ceases and the intellectual processing, if it continues, is colored by the emotional meaning. This can enhance the richness of personal conversation it can lead to painful misunderstandings, hurts and even danger. An intense reaction that leads to the topic or a few words becoming associated with that emotion is a desired result for the propagandists.
Today it seems formal education in "expression," as it was called in my day, has been replaced with education in P.R. and "spin." It is the meat of advertising, opinion writers and too often journalists and reporters. Though I am as prone as any human to react with emotion to certain things, I swear my scientist's brain always seeking truth gets boggled wondering if anyone out there is interested in speaking, much less hearing, truth.
I love the networks of electronic communication now at our beck and call but I do have to observe that it seems many of us are striving to talk, to express our version of truth while few are pausing to listen. But, frankly I am not that concerned. Once written it will be there a long time for the person wishing and in need to hear.
The anonymity and minimal ability for physical pingbacks on the nets raises concerns for some, particularly the professional spinners. I love it because it is creating a demos interconnected by written word as never before, communicating . The professionals decry that there is so much that is not properly sourced, even made up. I promise; just ask a politician; most lies put out on the Internet are exposed within minutes. Even so called scholarly articles put up by some kook can be exposed with a bit of Googling or a visit to Wikipedia. Besides a bunch of folks all looking things up get a lot of education.
2 comments
Now that commercial communication is not required to be balanced, citizens can tune in to the station/network that sings their song. For example, a conservative can listen only to stations or talking heads that give conservative viewpoints or a progressive can listen only to progressive viewpoints. Making this situation worse, the stations, networks or talking heads play on the fears of their listeners. Playing on fears gives more listeners/viewers and, thus, more money. Having staff rub menthol salve under Glen Beck’s eyes to make him tear up as he utters his conservative words is one example of how artificial these programs have become.
Maybe the general public will eventually grind down to a truth, but the process is much longer and uglier now without the sharing of balanced information required in the Fairness Doctrine.
Comments are not allowed from anonymous visitors.



