Are you giving out or getting through?
By Walter Boomsma
207 343-1842
Communications Director
Someone should do a study to answer this question: How much genuine communication takes place on social media? Stay with me—it’s an important question that actually isn’t limited to social media.
There’s a quotation from Sidney Harris on the masthead of the Bulletin. The two words’ information’ and ‘communication’ are often used interchangeably, but they signify quite different things. Information is giving out; communication is getting through.” If you have read the Bulletin and didn’t notice it, we’re not getting through. That shouldn’t be a surprise. One-way communication has its drawbacks. And, as a society, we are increasingly relying on one-way communication, whether we realize it or not.
I had an exasperating exchange on Facebook recently. I won’t bore you with the details as interesting as they might be. I was answering a writer’s question. Another person almost immediately jumped on me, “correcting” me. I responded to his comment by pointing out that I did not say (write) what he was criticizing me for, hoping he would see we weren’t communicating. He then proceeded to take a slightly different approach to telling me I was wrong anyway. I did not respond further and attempted to see some humor in it. Part of the humor was that the person who originally asked the question didn’t take part in the exchange.
My attacker had no desire to communicate. He was more interested in demonstrating how smart he was. He went off-topic, particularly when I challenged his understanding of what I’d written.
How often does that happen in our conversations? Are we giving out or getting through? We all want to be heard, and that’s not a bad thing. But we should be equally interested in being understood and at least mildly interested in our listeners. That’s much simpler to achieve in “live” in-person conversation. But it’s only easier if both parties are committed to communicating to create understanding.
A down-to-earth technique is called “clarifying and confirming.” It’s based on the assumption we should understand both what the other person is saying and why they are saying it.
“I love ice cream,” seems like a clear statement, at least as far as what is being said. If we want to understand, let’s be a little curious and ask (clarify) why the person loves ice cream. “Because it tastes good.” How’s our understanding? We won’t know for sure until we confirm it. “So what you’re saying is that you like ice cream because it tastes good.” That just might trigger more information. “Yeah, and I feel like I’m getting a treat…”
This becomes particularly important when our initial reaction to someone’s statement is to reject, ignore or disagree. How we react determines what happens next. A knee-jerk reaction may mean the conversation ends or develops into an argument. The few minutes required to demonstrate a desire to communicate by clarifying and confirming are well worth the effort. If you confirm that you are in total disagreement, understanding the “what and why” equips you to remain friends and perhaps even find a middle ground or compromise.
► FACT: Last week, the MSG website was viewed 328 times. The two most visited items were the Directory of Granges and the Mill Stream Grange post.
