May 31, 2007A Conversation About Conversations
Rosie left the show The View early this week because she and co-host Elisabeth had a hostile exchange where neither woman could hear what the other was saying.
Cindy Sheehan left the anti-war movement this week because she was worn down from attacks and slurs by …the left.
A very educated and intelligent friend concluded a political discussion this week by saying, “But truly I don’t know what is reality and what is spin. And I don’t have the energy or time to dig for the truth.”
What’s going on? According to Al Gore’s new book Assault on Reason, the national conversation is “broken” and needs to be fixed. He says logic and reason have been replaced with slogans and propaganda. He’s working to jumpstart a national conversation about the national conversation. That’s a conversation worth having.
Conversations about conversations – I often have them and I often recommend them. I’ve had many conversations with my own family about sarcasm being an unacceptable conversational modality. When I hire, I have conversations about how I like to be updated and how I like to address mistakes and track them to their source to ensure we don’t make the same ones again. When there is a communication breakdown, I’ll stop discussing the issue and refocus on how we can shift the dynamic and communicate better. Often when people ask me how to say something, I’ll suggest that instead of discussing the issue itself, they have a conversation about how to have the conversation.
When the conversations are broken at home, relationships suffer. When conversations are broken at work, business suffers. When the national conversation is broken, we all suffer.
Who benefits when it’s hard to know who’s telling the truth and who’s not? Who rejoices when people give up even trying to differentiate truth from spin? The clear answer is - the dishonest win. The dishonest don’t need to convince anyone they’re telling the truth. They only need to create a smokescreen of doubt and confusion to avoid being held accountable.
When you can’t tell truth from spin, it’s time to have a conversation about conversations. I have a few helpful phrases below, and there are many more in PowerPhrases.
2 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post.
| TrackBack URI
You can also bookmark
this on del.icio.us or check the cosmos
Meryl: Its quite interesting to me how two of the most verbal people, who are normally on the attack (rosie and cindy sheehan), shrink and quit when people are actually attacking back. I agree that people should have conversations about how to speak and perhaps to LISTEN to another side of the story. While these are two people I definately do not agree with, they have the right to express their opinions, while others have the right to disagree with them. I dont’ think they quit because of the manner in which they were treated, but because people were finally talking back to them.
Comment by Lynn Brothersen — May 31, 2007 @ 2:32 pm
Hi Lynn,
From what I hear, people have been talking back to these two for a long time. In both cases they felt abandoned by their own team. I DO believe it was how it was done.
I watched the Rosie - Elisabeth clip looking for the opportunities on both sides to break the dynamic. I saw many opportunities that both missed. I don’t watch the View enough to have a context for it, so I only speak to the dynamic of that discussion.
Rosie appeared quite hurt, but she expressed it in a hostile manner. I thought either of them could have defused the situation in an instant had they shown more of the vulnerability that was clearly there for them both.
A tangential thought -
Like you, I find it interesting how someone as outspoken as Rosie could be as hurt as Rosie appeared. I tend to like forceful people myself because I know where I stand with them, but I know many people automatically defend around them. So when Rosie said that when she defended her ideas, everyone took the side of “poor little Elisabeth,” I wondered if there was some truth and insight in that remark. Might people who come across as naturally aggressive have a harder time being heard sometimes? I’m one of those who used feigned innocence and see-how-you’ve-hurt-poor-little-me tactics until I learned to communicate more assertively.
I’m not saying Elisabeth does that - I haven’t seen her in action enough to know. Even if she doesn’t do it, I’m sure there are viewer who regard it that way.
In any case, they spoke of friendship, but they alienated each other with attacks. Had they kept their friendship front and center while they communicated their needs, it would have been a whole different conversation.
Comment by merylrunion — May 31, 2007 @ 6:06 pm