We need to be better at communicating

21 posts / 0 new

Sun, 2020-09-13 21:22

Aristotleded24

I've been thinking lately about issues of communication. I find it amazing that so many smart people who do politics seem to not understand basic aspects of communication, in particular that different people have different perceptual filters. To often, it seems like we are trying to convince people to care about the issues we think are important, rather than listening and seeing what will resonate to convince them. Kyle Kulinski talked about this, but there is another example that I think illustrates this point.

Recently, freelance journalist Anya Paramil appeared on Fox News with Tucker Carlson. Most of us are not fans of Tucker or Fox News, but look closely at what happened. She clearly understands Tucker and his audience, and uses that to frame her arguments. Everything she said is true, but it's the way she framed it. She knows what these people care about and how to appeal to them, and I think many Fox viewers who watched this clip were won over. This is an example of the kind of thing we need to be doing.

Mon, 2020-09-14 00:19

Pondering

Wow. Two best videos I have seen in a very long time and beautifully paired to illustrate the point. I really hope more people watch them and start a conversation.

Fri, 2020-09-18 08:54

Pondering

I was shocked when watching the video posted to see someone actually convince Tucker Carlson (gag) that the US is on the wrong side in Venezuela. I watched the first video after the second but seeing that convinced me to watch the first which was also useful.

Since then I stumbled on this article about the successful persuasion of Trump voters to switch to Biden.

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/09/experiment-wisconsin-m...

The Hub Project then conducted a new survey of the large group to measure the effects of the messages. The results surprised even the groups: The push knocked Trump’s approval on the economy down by 2.3 percent, approval of his tax cuts down more than 5 percent, and belief that his policies helped the Badger State down more than 8 percent. (The 2016 race in Wisconsin was decided by less than 1 percent of voters, or about 23,000 votes.) The effects were larger than those of most Trump-focused persuasion efforts, and the use of a control group means the results are highly reliable.

“The central thesis of this program was: Can we identify a group or groups of Americans who are open to hearing a progressive argument about the economy? And if we make that argument, can we win that argument?” says Bryan Bennett, the director of polling and analytics at the Hub Project. “This says yes.”

I've tried to open this type of conversation several times. The right set their thinktanks not on proving they are right, but on how to persuade people that they are.

In my view the left or progressives are too focused on proving they are right and not focused enough on how to pursuade other people on topics that will sway their votes.

Proving you are right and getting people to vote your way are two different things. People can agree that you are right and still vote against you.

Sun, 2020-09-27 11:00

(Reply to #3) #4

Aristotleded24

Pondering wrote:
In my view the left or progressives are too focused on proving they are right and not focused enough on how to pursuade other people on topics that will sway their votes.

Proving you are right and getting people to vote your way are two different things. People can agree that you are right and still vote against you.

People on the left generally tend to be more educated than their right-wing counterparts, and there is a common sentiment that people who don't vote their way are "ignorant." I'm apalled by that kind of condescending attitude. Anyone who's ever taken a course on effective communication understands as a first point that individuals have their own perceptual filters, and that you cannot communicate with someone if you don't understand that. This clip from The Simpsons illustrates that point rather dramaticaly. Notice how at the very end that Homer hears the exact opposite message to what Flanders is trying to communicate? That is how perceptual filters work.

To illustrate the point even more strongly, take public opinion polling in Manitoba. One of the trend that is consistent is that people who have only completed high school tend to support the PCs. If the NDP is the party of the average person, why don't these "non-elite" people support them? Sure the left bandies about "educating" people, but even if that were a desireable goal (and half the time when they say "educate" I believe "indoctrinate the public to our worldview") we are not there. We have to meet the voters where they are. Futhermore, take a look at surveys of adult literacy in Canada:

Quote:
Canada is a “C” performer on the percentage of adults that scored low on adult literacy rate tests. Four out of ten Canadian adults lack the literacy skills necessary to be fully competent in most jobs in our modern economy. There are no superstars on this indicator. Even in Sweden—this year’s top performer in the Conference Board rankings—nearly 30 per cent of adults have low-level literacy skills.

There is more out there for anyone who is interested. I just wanted to highlight it in an easily read way.

The truth is, different people respond differently. You would not talk to a child the same way you would talk to a teenager or the same way you would talk to an adult about something. You need to take into account where they are.

Here is an artist who knows how to successfully communicate complex ideas in a readable format.

Sat, 2020-10-17 12:02

Aristotleded24

How to change someone's mind about who she/he/they is voting for

Sat, 2020-10-17 15:14

MegB

Aristotleded24, I've edited the above post to recognize non-binary gender. Also, please stop capitalizing every word in your thread titles. It's much easier to use the proper format to begin with than for me to have to go in and edit it after the fact. Thanks.

Mon, 2020-10-19 22:12

Aristotleded24

Here is the opposite example, a communications blunder from our Mayor:

Quote:
Winnipeg Mayor Brian Bowman had a message for anti-mask protestors who have been holding rallies against mandatory mask rules in the city in recent weeks.

During a news conference Friday afternoon, Bowman spoke about the recent rallies, including one outside of Winnipeg City Hall nearly two weeks ago.

“In a country like Canada, where we are a free and democratic society, lawful, peaceful protests are obviously okay,” he said.

“In terms of the substance of the protest though, while I recognize that not everyone can wear a mask, for everyone else, simple message; wear a friggin’ mask. Look after people other than yourself, and you can do that by simply wearing a mask.”

How friggin dense is Bowman? However the majority of us feel about mask wearing (personally I think it should be done) these people for whatever reason don't feel it's necessary or helpful. What practical good does it do to just tell someone they should do something they don't want to? Is that good communication at all? What was the goal here? Do you think any of these protesters are now going to turn around and say, "well, I have my reasons for why I don't believe in mask use, but now all of a sudden I've changed my mind because Bowman said I should?"

Tue, 2020-10-20 20:33

laine lowe laine lowe's picture

Given that many of the organizers of these anti-mask, anti-restricitons protesters are from far right agitation groups that take inspiration from similar rallies in the US, I have no problem with Bowman's messaging. Luckily I am not a politician or in front of a microphone because even in trying to gain composure, I am sure my eye roll and FFS under my breath (and mask :-)) would be caught and not appreciated by that audience.

Tue, 2020-10-20 20:57

Aristotleded24

That may be so but what does Bowman say "wear a mask" accomplish in the real world? Does it make him feel good? The whole point is about communication, and him telling them to do something they clearly don't want to do isn't going to change anything. To me, it's just more feel-good virtue signalling that politicians typically do whenever they have the chance. In some cases, maybe an eye-roll and moving on is the correct response, and that's fine. What I'm specifically talking about here is the idea of communicating with others and bringing them onside. I'm using examples of instances I thought were well done and instances that were poorly done to make my point.

Tue, 2020-10-20 21:05

#10

laine lowe laine lowe's picture

In my view, kowtowing to "freedom of speech" when those rallying or protesting having only have hatred for government sanctioned public safety measures (and public policy in general) lacks backbone. It's like Friesan being the Minister of Health who has the portfolio of dealing with the pandemic and supporting the public health officials and still attending one of these rallies and saying something to the effect that they make some good points. In his case, I am sure if he weren't in public office, he would be among the protesters.

Tue, 2020-10-20 22:51

#11

Aristotleded24

As a communication tactic, I think just ignoring them would have been better. In any case, I'm far more concerned about the public policiy decisions Bowman makes as Mayor than whatever he thinks or says about an issue over which the citiy has limited control anyways.

As for free speech? Well yes. These people have the freedom of speech to advocate for what they believe in (short of serious things like inciting physical violence). The rest of us are free to decide what we think and how we feel about it. In any case, I'm not scared of an anti-mask rally or demonstrations or anti-maskers. Public opinion is not on their side, and I'm confident that in an open debate on the subject I can make the more convincing arguments. I am scared of the fact that our Premier can arbitrarily extend the state of emergency without having to go to the Legislature and ask for an extension. I am scared of a mob mentality that pathologizes people doing normal social interactions because if the virus spreads and kills a person they are somehow morally culpable as individuals. Heck, I'm scared that if I for whatever reason end up walking past such a demonstration and a picture of me near that group ends up in the newspaper, on TV or social media that I could lose my job over that.

Tue, 2020-10-20 22:56

#12

Unionist

Wearing a mask, and physical distancing, should be the law (in appropriate circumstances). Same as obeying speed limits, or not driving with a cellphone in your hand. Appealing to people's good sense or conscience, or trying to shame individuals into not spreading a deadly virus, is ridiculous.

Tue, 2020-10-20 22:55

#13

Pondering

In this particular case it is telling them that mask wearing helps reduce the transmission of Covid-19 so just wear the mask or be socially ostricized and unable to enter buildings with mask rules.

There is no point in discussion because they will not be pursuaded by logic.

Tue, 2020-10-20 23:00

(Reply to #13) #14

Aristotleded24

Unionist wrote:
Wearing a mask, and physical distancing, should be the law (in appropriate circumstances). Same as obeying speed limits, or not driving with a cellphone in your hand. Appealing to people's good sense or conscience, or trying to shame individuals into not spreading a deadly virus, is ridiculous.

I agree with you on the shaming part. I disagree slightly on the appeal to conscience. I believe that with accurate health information and the freedom for people to engage or not engage in society as they so choose (which would include some form of pension for older workers in places like meat plants to stay off work for the duration of the pandemic) most people would make wise public health decisions. In any case, you're also correct that we're never going to have everybody agree with us.

Wed, 2020-10-21 20:30

#15

laine lowe laine lowe's picture

How old are the workers in places like meat processing plants that have been diagnosed with COVID-19? There was another outbreak at a chicken plant south of Winnipeg. If it's only workers over the age of 60 that are catching it, then for sure some kind of incentive for early retirement could be considered. But I would hope it closely matches whatever they are earning on the factory floor.

Pallister's messaging seems to vascilate between moral persuasion and scolding. His goal has been clearly to keep Maniitoba open for business as much as possible and the rolling out of restricitons based on ever changing numbers were always timid with lots of appeal to good conscience and the "repeat, lather and rinse" phrase of keeping up with the fundamentals (social distancing, washing hands, staying home if you feel sick). And when the lighter touch approach to restrictions fails, Pallister issues scolding statements like one would to a teenager caught breaking curfew or taking the family car for a joy ride without permission.

Overall, especially with the first snow fall, I think Pallister is terribly bitter that he can't be back on his estate in Costa Rica :-)

Thu, 2020-10-22 03:14

(Reply to #15) #16

Aristotleded24

laine lowe wrote:
How old are the workers in places like meat processing plants that have been diagnosed with COVID-19? There was another outbreak at a chicken plant south of Winnipeg. If it's only workers over the age of 60 that are catching it, then for sure some kind of incentive for early retirement could be considered. But I would hope it closely matches whatever they are earning on the factory floor.

Absoultely the subsidy has to be closer to whatever wage is being offered. The reason I mentioned older workers is, using a risk-based strategy, and we know that older workers are more likely to experience a bad outcome, then it makes sense to give them that option for the duration.

Keep in mind that as we are sitting safely behind our computers and doing the Zoom thing, these outbreaks are still happening. Workplaces like meat plants were going to be covid hotspots regardless of whether we kept everything open, shut everything down, or had an in-between response. That's where having strong unions matter, so they can negotiate things like working conditions, protective equipment, paid leave/shorter work weeks for workers, or what have you. In other words, give people direclty affected a say.

Thu, 2020-10-22 20:21

#17

laine lowe laine lowe's picture

One of the chicken processing plant workers that had COVID-19 has died and he was only 41 years old.

Fri, 2020-10-23 12:55

#18

Pondering

I am convinced that the focus on the leath of the elderly from the beginning has been intended to rassure workers under 65 that cannot work from home that they are perfectly safe. That the precautions they have to take, like mask wearing and hand washing is just to protect the elderly and the weak.

It has backfired to some extent because young people feel if they are safe and not visiting parents or grandparents then it is no big deal. They might not even know if they are sick so no biggy.

it is more dangerous for the elderly and those with compromised health as is everything else. It is also more dangerous for the elderly to be in a car accident that doesn't make it safe for everyone else.

Government messaging has been manipulative from the start.

Sun, 2020-10-25 02:43

(Reply to #18) #19

Aristotleded24

laine lowe wrote:
One of the chicken processing plant workers that had COVID-19 has died and he was only 41 years old.

I saw that, and it was very frightening to me. It is the same frightened reaction whenever I see an obituary, memoriam, or news report of anyone dying much too young before their time.

Pondering wrote:
I am convinced that the focus on the leath of the elderly from the beginning has been intended to rassure workers under 65 that cannot work from home that they are perfectly safe. That the precautions they have to take, like mask wearing and hand washing is just to protect the elderly and the weak.

It has backfired to some extent because young people feel if they are safe and not visiting parents or grandparents then it is no big deal. They might not even know if they are sick so no biggy.

it is more dangerous for the elderly and those with compromised health as is everything else. It is also more dangerous for the elderly to be in a car accident that doesn't make it safe for everyone else.

I'm wondering if by thinking about people who are "vulnerable" or "not vulnerable," we are actually putting vulnerable people more at risk. Here is how this plays out.

In this part of the world, young people go off and they do their own thing. "It's an old person thing, not something I have to worry about," they may say. It's very easy when you are not surrounded by older people. In other parts of the world, multi-generational families are the norm, and it seems like such areas did better against the coronavrius. In this setting, you have young people who live with their grandparents. Even if they don't have grandparents, their friends do, and they've probably know their friend's grandparents very well. So taking proper precautions is just something they learn by experience. It's not something they need to be told to do. Sure, young people still do their thing, go out, go to school, go to clubs and parties, but they always have in the back of their mind that they need to be careful. I wonder if that awareness makes a difference in simple everyday behaviours, such as whether a person coughs into a sleeve or the air on a crowded bus.

Wed, 2020-10-28 14:53

(Reply to #19) #20

Aristotleded24

laine lowe wrote:
One of the chicken processing plant workers that had COVID-19 has died and he was only 41 years old.

His name was Gabriel Deng. So tragic that he came here to find a better life for himself only for this to happen.

Wed, 2020-10-28 15:23

#21

Pondering

Those workers need to be first in line along with staff in medical institutions to receive vaccines.