Touro Communication Club Notes #44

tourocommunicationclub.blogspot.com

Well, the first 2008 Presidential Debate is history. Both sides are claiming victory. There were no gaffes or major missteps. Many people thought McCain and Obama debated to a draw. Although both Senators used exaggerations, hyperbolic statements, stretching the truth, quotes out of context, it would take an expert to figure out the precision of their statements.

From a communication viewpoint, I’ve become concerned with several factors.

1. The polls continue to show a neck-and-neck horse race. In the remaining days before the election on Tuesday, November 4^th, little things could assume magnified importance and become “game-changers.” Oddly, the financial crisis looms over the election, but seems mysteriously separated from the contest

2. Regardless of what the candidates say, the polls indicate that the voters are holding their positions. That implies that the voters are emotionally steadfast in their support of their candidates.

3. This leads me to observe that no argument is ultimately persuasive, if the voter has made up his/her mind. My frequent observation is that “Emotion trumps reason, especially in crisis.” I begin to doubt that ANYTHING can be taught “reasonably” if emotion is so dominant.

4. I also begin to wonder how to teach my students how to listen critically when so much of the speech-making is full of factual manipulation. How does a person with little or no specific evidence figure out whether the speaker is distorting the facts. How can anyone recognize “spin” or a manipulation of the truth is being thrown at them? Despite my feeble efforts, I still dunno – yet.

5. Lastly, the phrase “You don’t have a second chance to make a first impression” is certainly true in politics as it is in job interviews. Aristotle’s “ethos” seems to dominate “logos” and “pathos” Personality can be more important than substance.

In the coming weeks, we have a chance to take a close observation of two political campaigns – one fictional (“The20Candidate”) and one factual dramatization (“Recount”) As we watch both films, observe the strategic and tactical manipulation that both sides employ to win the election. “The Great Debaters” dramatizes the enormous effort that debaters experience as they prepare for the most demanding intellectual combat.

Here's our schedule:

Thursday, October 2 , 2008 – 2 pm – Room 610 – Theatre – We will discuss the range of possible activities we could explore in this new component. We should close with some elementary acting exercises. There are so many aspects of the theatre that can enhance everyone’s presentation.

Tuesday, October 7, 2008 – 2 pm – Room 226 The film “The Candidate” (1973) with Robert Redford. This Oscar winning script takes a biting look at the nature of politics.

After the film, we’ll discuss the many aspects of Robert Redford’s experience running for office, the “handling” of the candidate, the opposing messages and the impact of Redford’s “pretty boy” looks toward stacking the outcome. Most importantly, the final scene make strong editorial comment about what a candidate is going to do once elected.

What happened on September 24, 2008 – Discussing the Politics of the Election

Somehow I didn’t get the sign-in sheet. So I will have to guess at who was there Richard Green. Olushile Akintade, James Millner, Brian Brown, Amina Bibi were there when Hal Wicke, George Backinoff, Lorinda Moore and Jason Carvell arrive from a Faculty Development meeting.Marcus Vay ndorf has already left. If I missed others, I’ll include them in the next notes.

As near as I could deduce from the excitement in the air about the discussion, the large group had a productive discussion. Richard who galvanized the discussion has printed Chapter 11of the debate text he uses at Avenue J entitled, “Logic is Not Enough: Use other Sources of Persuasion, too.”

In the discussion one term stood out. Senator Joe Biden was frequently accused of “logorrhea.” Defined as excessive talking, one jokester called it “Diarrhea of the mouth.”

Some of the issues I gleaned included:

• There was a clash of speaking styles between McCain and Obama. McCain’s short punchy sentences contrasted with Obama’s longer sentences. (One of the rhetorical complaints about Senator Kerry in the 2004 election was that he spoke in “paragraphs” while George Bush delivered “bumper-sticker” sentences. (Do people listen to paragraphs?)
• There were abundant comments about the candidates delivering lies, counter-lies, distortions, mis-representations, stretching the facts,
• Many sound bites seem ed ot be persuasive.
• The 1960 debate between Nixon and Kennedy – the first in television history- demonstrated how pretty looks trumped substance. George Backinoff commented on how an audiotape demonstrated how much more substantive Nixon’s presentation was, yet on television people noticed his scowl and his five-o’clock shadow.
• People seem to live in a bubble. Do election issues ever reach them?

The conversation could have continued far beyond our time. As people were leaving Amina raised the issue of the recent Pakistani bombings and her concern that nothing much had appeared in the media. She wanted to organize some kind of political protest action. After many suggestions from Jason, George, Lorinda,. Hal suggested that she write up a proposal that the club would discuss at our next gathering.

Next time, the club will begin alternating between general topics in communication, debate and the theatre/drama.

These sessions continue to be open for everyone to attend. Bring a friend and join in the excitement. See you next time.

Hal Wicke

Touro Communication Club Notes #43
tourocommunicationclub.blogspot.com

Watch for the film schedule: “The Candidate” (1973) with Robert Redford: “Recount” (2008) with Kevin Spacey; and “The Great Debaters” (2008) with Denzel Washington.

This week, the Presidential race took a backseat to the financial crisis on Wall Street which soon will have its impact on Main Street. In the worst financial calamity since the Depression in 1929, Americans will be taking on $1 trillion (that’s $1,000,000,000,000) debt. Much of debt will be underwritten by Washington who has foreign countries holding our enormous I.O.U.s..

Two competing philosophies collided this week as unfettered free market capitalism imploded without adequate government regulation, weakened by the current administration. In the newly configured arrangement on Wall Street, government and business must work together as intertwined entities. Hmmm, a new thought.

WRITE DOWN THESE DATES
The Commission on Presidential Debates has announced the schedule:


First presidential debate on Domestic Policy:

Friday, September 26, 2008

University of Mississippi, Oxford, MS

Vice presidential debate:

Thursday, October 2, 2008

Washington University in St. Louis, MO

Second presidential debate

(a town meeting format):

Tuesday, October, 2008

Belmont University, Nashville, TN

Third presidential debate on Foreign Policy:

Wednesday, October 15, 2008

Hofstra University, Hempstead, NY.

The Commission also announced formats for the debates.

All debates will be ninety minutes in length and start at 9:00 p.m. ET. Each debate will be administered by a single moderator.

The first presidential debate will focus on domestic policy; the third presidential debate will focus on foreign policy.

The second presidential (town meeting format) debate will include any issues raised by members of that audience, and the vice presidential debate will include domestic and foreign policy.

In each debate except the town meeting format, the candidates will be seated at a table with the moderator.

Each of those debates will be divided into 8 ten-minute issue segments; the moderator will introduce each segment with an issue on which each candidate will comment, after which the moderator will facilitate further discussion of the issue, including direct exchange between the candidates, for the balance of that segment. Time will be reserved for closing statements by each of the candidates in each debate.

Here's our schedule:
Wednesday, September 24, 2008 – 2 pm Room 610 – Debate - SPAR debate – the usual silliness that really tests linear thinking and relevant evidence. The Greed debate took on new meaning with this financial crisis!

Thursday, October 2 , 2008 – 2 pm – Room 610 – Theatre – We will discuss the range of possible activities we could explore in this new component. We should close with some elementary acting exercises. There are so many aspects of the theatre that can enhance everyone’s presentation.
What happened on September 17, 2008 – A Potluck Discussion
Present: Lorinda Moore, Richard Green, Drani Gabu, Olushile Akintade, James Millner, Hal Wicke, Amina Bibi, (newcomer) Marcus Vayndorf and Stephen Gradman.

We had the greatest of intentions of talking about gender communication, but Lorinda’s story set the tone for a free-for-all discussion about a variety of topics.

Lorinda shared her surprise reaction to the view of business expressed by students in her marketing class. She reported the students viewed that the sole purpose of business was to make money. She felt the students did not have a sense of morality or ethics in how their viewed business.

As the discussion developed, it was clear that a clash of cultures between what the purpose of business was. ”Business is business,” said one person. Questions were raised at to whom corporations were responsible. Corporations seem to hide behind a façade of doing good but are only interested in making money. The group seemed to be divided in its view of business.

Newcomer Marcus, a Mathematics instructor, offered his authoritative worldview of systems. He spoke of how Soviet Russia exploited workers because of its belief in the Communist system.

Before Marcus left for class, Hal asked him if he was willing to undergo a communication analysis in public. He graciously accepted, not fully knowing what he was getting into. Hal pointed Marcus’ strong voice, his definitive gestures and relentless delivery.

A discussion continued regarding how speaking style influences the receipt of information by the listener.

As the group was departing, Hal said that Lonyell Tolbert of the Midtown Learning Center asked him if he would start a drama club. He said that he couldn’t do an additional club, but he was willing to add a theatre/drama component to the Communication Club meetings. The group seemed to think that would be a good addition to the club’s offerings.

In the future meetings, the club will alternate between general topics in communication, de bate and the theatre/drama.

These sessions continue to be open for everyone to attend. Bring a friend and join in the excitement. See you next time.

Hal Wicke

Touro Communication Club Notes #42

tourocommunicationclub.blogspot.com

To see the two presidential candidates walk together down the ramp at Ground Zero on September 11^th was an unusual sight. It was odd to have a day of respite between the nasty campaigning. To add to the political stew, Gov. Sarah Palin went under the microscope with ABC anchor Charles Gibson. (She kept calling him “Charlie” as if she had known him for years, rather than second.) (Sorry for the mixed metaphor.)

With Hurricane Ike as a catastrophic distraction to the presidential campaign, both events demonstrated how Mother Nature and Human Nature can be so devastating to human aspirations. In New York City, we forget how powerful Mother Nature can be. We are also reminded in this campaign – and others before it – how poorly humans treat eat other. It sometimes feels that having a positive impulse is a lonely activity. The debris of human history is sometimes punctuated with moments of upbeat actions. We seem to always have to relive constantly the dreadful contents of Pandora’s box before we discover the sliver of hope at the bottom.

These thoughts gave rise to this week’s Communication Club topic of strategies in presidential politics. If we can learn how to strategize the direction of our lives from watching experts compete for the big brass ring, maybe then we can adopt some of these strategies to our own lives. We can only observe, listen and practice applying them.

Two weeks ago, I had the pleasure of talking at length to the freshman Congresswoman, Yvette Clarke, a Democrat from the 11^th district of Brooklyn, at our annual neighborhood block party. Among the slew of questions I asked her was, “What did you learn upon arriving in Washington that you didn’t know before?” She was quick to respond, “I didn’t realize how naïve I was about how difficult it is to get things done in Congress. The gridlock makes it virtually impossible to do anything constructive.” As she approaches her second election, she is running unopposed and will no doubt be re-elected by what she calls the most diverse Congressional district in the nation. I was struck by how few people came up to speak to her.

Here's our schedule:

Wednesday, September 17, 2008 – 2 pm Room 610. Club – Gender Communication. How men talk to women. How women talk to women. How men talk to men. Ever since Adam and Eve there has been a battle between Mars and Venus.

Wednesday, September 24, 2008 – 2 pm Room 610 – Debate - SPAR debate – the usual silliness that really tests linear thinking and relevant evidence

The Club will be co-sponsoring with Mr. Mason an upcoming film series co-sponsored by the Club and Mr. Mason’s office on Debate and Presidential Politics. Possible films might be “The Great Debaters” (2008) with Denzel Washington, “Recount” (2008), a fictionalized documentary about the 2000 election with Kevin Spacey and “The Candidate” (1972) with Robert Redford.

What happened on September 10, 2008 – Strategies in Presidential Politics

Present: Lorinda Moore, Olushile Akintade, James Millner, Carlisle Yearwood, Hal Wicke and, at the end, George Backinoff.

On the whiteboard, Hal had written a chart

+ The Goal: White House.

+ The Competitors: McCain/Palin and Obama/Biden

+ The Issues:

• Iraq/Afghanistan
• Housing
• Security
• Taxes
• Health Care
• Education
• Energy
• Bush legacy – domestic and foreign
• Wedge issues: same-sex marriage, abortion, stem-cell research, gun rights, women as presidential/vice-presidential candidates, “Bridge to Nowhere” and earmarks.

After a brief summary of each of the positions of both candidates, the group then focused on how each issue was to be strategized to present the most persuasive campaign program for the McCain camp (because the Obama camp was over-represented in the group.

The exchange for the next 90 minutes was fast, furious and exciting. We came up with a list of strategies that the McCain might use to defeat Obama. They included:

• Float untested ideas
• Push the envelope
• Change the definition of words
• Switch issues when unable to defend another issue
• Mea culpa – admit wrong on minor issues
• Assume a bi-partisan stance – regardless of what the reality was/is
• Appeal to “Country” and “Patriotism”
• Plan for an “October Surprise” (perhaps the Palin choice)
• Go negative – find all the negatives in the Obama/Biden campaign
• Discredit the accomplishments of the opponent
• Show family support during appearances
• Puff the highlights of the candidates’ resume
• Push “Maverick” concept to show independence from Washington
• Use “bait and switch” tactic” – show how opponent will promise more, deliver less
• Of course, there’s the always desperate tactic of “lying” or better, “making up facts.”

As our energy flagged, the discussion turned to whether we used these strategies in our personal relationships. The question of whether calculating a response was manipulating a relationship. Do I have a conscious agenda with another person? Should I? How carefully should I/ must I choose my words carefully? Or should I say what I want to say every time? Should I be open and free or calculating?

We probably could have continued for another hour or so. But we decided that our next topic should be “Gender Communication” – how men and women talk to each other, how men talk to men and how women talk to women. The topic is an important one in all our Interpersonal Communication classes, but we are going to start with everyone’s definition and proceed from there. It should be exciting.

After the session, Hal received the following email from Carlisle Yearwood,

Your last meeting was quite uplifting. In fact, it was so inspirational, that I hated to leave. I felt a sense of loss when I left you, because you were offering an inter-disciplinary lesson about life and education. It had Latin, Logic, Rhetoric, Politics, History, and Creative Thinking. These disciplines were subject to the effective use of language.

Carlisle is always very generous in his comments. However, without the enormous contributions of everyone present - Lorinda, Shile, James and, of course, dear Professor Yearwood, our discussion would have fallen flat on its face.

From time to time, I have to pinch myself to realize how extraordinarily articulate this group has become over the last year. There is no hesitancy about expressing an opinion, even if it is contrary to the prevailing ideas.

These sessions continue to be open for everyone to attend. Bring a friend and join in the excitement. See you next time.

Hal Wicke

Touro Communication Club Notes #41

tourocommunicationclub.blogspot.com

Now that both conventions are over, the Presidential campaign steps into high gear. Both Democratic and Republican candidates will hammer away at the other side while boosting their own policies. Although tiresome at times, this is the only way candidates can make their case to the voters. And here is where our interest in communication becomes very important.

Rightly or wrongly, most of us know the candidates only through a filter. A filter is what someone else says about a topic or person. A filter could be your parent, friend or colleague. However, the biggest filter in all this will be the media – TV, radio, newspapers, magazines, bloggers. The voter has to work hard to figure out through the media filter what the candidates stand for 0in specific terms.

For the Communicator, all your Communication tools need to operate overtime:

• Your listening skills must be very sharp,
• Separate YOUR emotions/ bias/prejudice toward to candidate from what he/she says.
• Your ability to analyze the message (logos, pathos, ethos),
• In the analysis of the candidate’s message, do you separate logos from pathos from ethos and weighting the strength/weakness of each
• Discovering the impact of language choice on the message,
• Noticing and analyzing the evidence (type, source, reliability, accuracy)

(Some of you have that list I prepared for the debate club a while ago.)

• Notice the Non-verbals of the candidate. What do they do for/against the candidate?
• Observe the kind(s) of responses each gives to an interviewer (boiler plate/memorized or a considered answer).
• Notice how much adaptation the candidate gives to the local audience and/or interviewer.

As always in oral communication, so much happens at once. Once said, the moment is gone. It is hard for the untrained person to separate emotionally from the speaker. It is difficult to keep a clear sense of how he/she is answering questions or presenting their point of view to the audience.

But most of all, all of us “Communicators-in-Training” need to know what WE stand for, what WE believe in, what WE will support. Ultimately we are using our Communication tools to enrich our own world views and quickly recognize where we agree or disagree with another’s point of view. The process is a life-long journey.

Next time, I’ll write about my long conversation today with a new member of Congress, Yvette Clarke, of the 11^th District in Brooklyn. She replaced Major Owens.

Here's our schedule: (We are now in Room 610 @ 50 West.)

Wednesday, September 10, 2008 - 2 pm– The Communication Club will be meeting: Open Agenda.

Wednesday, September 17, 2008 – 2 pm Room 610 (Note time and place change). Club – Open agenda for the moment – Possible topics: continuation of the Story telling/ Leadership discussion, the Presidential campaign, etc. There will be an upcoming film series co-sponsored by the Club and Mr. Mason’s office on Debate and Presidential Politics. Possible films might be “The Great Debaters” (2008) with Denzel Washington, “Recount” (2008), a fictionalized documentary about the 2000 election with Kevin Spacey and “The Candidate” (1972) with Robert Redford.

What happened on September 3, 2008 – SPAR D ebates

Present – Richard Green, Jetante Morris, Lorinda Moore, David Nussbaum, Drani Gabu, Olushile Akintade, Urmi Nath, Amina Bibi, James Millner and Hal Wicke

The ten people went through two exciting SPAR debates. The topics were:

“A rolling stone gathers no moss.”

Affirmative – David

Negative – Drani

To make the debate more interesting, the debaters were to use only social evidence.

David, arguing the Affirmative case, won the debate 5-1

The second debate topic was “Greed is good.”

Affirmative – Shile

Negative – Amina

This time, the debaters were to use only evidence from current events.

Amina, arguing the negative case, won the debate 5-2.

After the vote in each round, the “judges” analyzed the strengths and weaknesses of both debaters, followed by a self-critique by each of the debaters themselves.

Then the discussion expanded to a variety of issues, particularly the Presidential campaign. Not surprisingly, everyone shared their opinion, some more loudly than others. Hal tried unsuccessfully for the group to focus on what the strategy of each candidate had in mind when each presented a point.

Clearly the Communicators have much work to do to separate the issue from the strategy behind to choice of issue. As in all contests, political and sports, WHAT (action)is done on the court or field has to be separated with the WHY (or strategy) behind the action.

Hal Wicke

Touro Communication Club Notes #40

tourocommunicationclub.blogspot.com
August seems to be a month for historic events. The 19^th Amendment recognizing Women’s Suffrage and Dr. Martin Luther King’s “I have a Dream Speech” are two of this month’s momentous happenings. The specter of the possible landfall of Hurricane Gustav on a date close to the catastrophic Hurricane Katrina arrival (8/29) three years ago is incredibly dreadful.

The Democratic convention speeches – Obama, Clinton, Clinton and Obama – will be followed on Monday by the Republican convention speeches – McCain and Sarah Palin, a newcomer on the national political scene. McCain’s choice of Governor Palin completes the ground-breaking nature of this Presidential campaign - an African-American from Hawaii, a white woman from Alaska. A first on four counts especially since Alaska and Hawaii are the last two states to be admitted to the United States and neither one is contiguous to mainland U.S. The fall campaign promises some exciting debating. We have to keep our listening and critical thinking wits about us.

From a Communication viewpoint, all four Democratic speeches were “stem-winders” – a speech that knocks the socks off its already biased audience. It is rare, in my experience, that so many speakers in one party have extraordinary persuasive skills. In next week’s Republican convention, I hope that the rhetorical riches continue.

In 2004, the Department began its Presidential Debate series with the Bush/Kerry debates followed by a critical analysis. Now in 2008 with the formation of the Communication Club, we will continue our playing and studying the Presidential debates. In addition we will be co-sponsoring with Mr. Mason’s Site Director’s office a Debate and Presidential Politics film series. – see below.

Don’t forget that Ramadan – one of the five pillars of Islam – begins on Monday, September lst and runs through September 30. Ramadan is a Muslim religious observance that takes place during the ninth month of the Islamic calendar, believed to be the month in which the Qur'an (Koran) began to be revealed. It is the Islamic month of fasting, in which Muslims don't eat or drink anything from dawn until sunset. Fasting is meant to teach the person patience and humility. Ramadan is a time to fast for the sake of God, and to offer even more prayer than usual. Also, asking forgiveness for the sins of the past, asking for guidance in the future, and asking for help with refraining from every day evils and try to purify oneself through self-restraint and good deeds is involved in Ramadan. (cf.: Wikipedia)

Here's our schedule: (We are now in Room 610 @ 50 West.)

Wednesday, September 3, 2008 - 1 pm - Debate – We’ll discuss our fall plans while SPAR-ing. Everyone seems to find the sessions very exciting

The SGS Student Orientation is scheduled for Wednesday, September 10^th @ 2 pm in Room 314 @ 27 West.. Since Lorinda, James and Shile are involved with the presentation, we will skip our club meeting for this week.

Wednesday, September 17, 2008 – 2 pm Room 610 (Note time and place change). Club – Open agenda for the moment – Possible topics: continuation of the Story telling/ Leadership discussion, the Presidential campaign, etc. There will be an upcoming film series c o-sponsored by the Club and Mr. Mason’s office on Debate and Presidential Politics. Possible films might be “The Great Debaters” (2008) with Denzel Washington, “Recount” (2008), a fictionalized documentary about the 2000 election with Kevin Spacey and “The Candidate” (1972) with Robert Redford.

What happened on August 26 – Richard Green – “Leadership through Storytelling

Present – Kazi Faltah, Richard Green, David Nussman, James Millner, Lorinda Moore Hal Wicke and Olushile Akintade.

Richard began his presentation with a comment quoted from the title of a book of short essays by Robert Fulghum first published in 1986: "All I Really Need To Know I Learned in Kindergarten." In preparing his TESOL class in Oral English this summer, he had to relearn how to teach through storytelling, K-8. This endeavor raised his awareness on many levels of the power of story telling for all age groups.

Richard showed a small chalkboard with “Leadership through Storytelling” on one side and “Managing Expectations” on the other. On his laptop he played a Charlie Rose program (Channel 13 weeknights @ 11 pm) where various journalists commented on Michelle Obama’s speech on the opening night (8/25/08) of the Democratic Convention in Denver.

He pointed out that the Democrats emphasized “Patriotism, Family & Faith.” He handed out an essay, “Articles of Faith.” He said that personal history matters.

Other handouts included: "Reading and Interpreting Body Language," and, "What Your Voice Says About You, "

He said that story telling is very transformative. He felt that Michelle Obama gave Barack Obama a face to his voice, particularly in the segment where Barack was shown with his children after his wife’s speech. Another handout listed the many kinds of stories we could choose.

There was some discussion about filters, hearing titles and religious overtones. Richard pointed out that Garrison Keillor was a storyteller who did not follow the prescribed model of what a storyteller “should” be. Comments were made about how the presentation of the Code of Conduct was presented in the wrong way.

Richard urged the group to celebrate the wealth of common experience each of us possesses before trying to understand others’ diversity.

Kazi noted about the British influence in Bangladesh making people conscious of who the citizens were. But in America, we are more aware than anyone else. Richard reminded the group of E.B. White’s essay on the 3 kinds of New Yorkers – native, moved to NYC and the immigrant population. Kazi was concerned that Americans get lazy because they don’t exercise their privileges. E.B. White wrote in the first paragraph of "Here is New York:"

"There are roughly three New Yorks. There is, first, the New York of the man or woman who was born there, who takes the city for granted and accepts its size, its turbulence as natural and inevitable. Second, there is the New York of the commuter--the city that is devoured by locusts each day and spat out each night. Third, there is New York of the person who was born somewhere else and came to New York in quest of something. Of these trembling cities the greatest is the last--the city of final destination, the city that is a goal. "

Lorinda characterized a person by their “swagger” – how each person exemplified their individual style by how he/she showed their “swagger.” “Following is not a swagger,” she said. Shile commented on his SPAR debate last week, interpreting the “Flies/honey vs vinegar” cliché in a Nigerian context. Lorinda recalled the unexpected behavior of football player, Rosie Grier, contrasting his burly frame with his interest in knitting.

Many other topics included Richard reminding us of the power of story telling, masks and facades and sharing our identity with our stories.

The session closed with each of the group sharing a personal story. Lorinda, James, Kazi, Hal, Shi le, David and Richard shared stories. Rather than recounting each one, let it be said that everyone was charmed, amused, touched and warmed by the distinctiveness of each of the stories.

Lorinda remarked how much she felt the bond among the group that was heightened by the stories. The stories made her experience everyone in a different way.

Shile muttered under his breath to Hal that he didn’t think the faculty would share a story. Hal expressed surprise. Shile said he needed to think about why he thought they wouldn’t.

We’ll get back to you on this.

See you next time. Bring a friend!

Hal Wicke

Touro Communication Club Notes #39

tourocommunicationclub.blogspot.com

Personal news: after a traumatic week, the computer was restored to its original condition with all the data saved. Andrea found a computer wizard in Valley Stream.

Well, we now have a Democratic VEEP candidate just before the Democratic convention begins on Monday in Denver. Senator Joseph Biden of Delaware seemed to be preferred by the media pundits to add foreign policy experience to the resume of Senator Obama. One Fox commentator said that Obama had the thinnest resume for any President in the history of the country. Does anyone want to verify THAT assertion?!

The McCain folks immediately issued an attack ad showing Biden saying that Obama had no experience when they were in the long Democratic candidate debate cycle. How the Obama campaign will counter these attack ads will be interesting to watch.

The Beijing Olympics continue to fascinate me because politics still have an impact on this world exhibition of elite athleticism. We can learn from how athletes think and train. “Focus” seems to be the trait that all of us can learn from these athletes.

Politics and sports offer important lessons for Communicators. Politics provides a smorgasbord of predictable and unpredictable human interactions while sports is relatively clean and structured with a referee interpreting “rules.” Most of life doesn’t have a referee in all situations. We have to be skilled in our human communication because we meet so many different people in a Touro day who have different beliefs, perceptions and ways of behaving.

Here's our schedule: (We are still in Room 615.)

Wednesday, August 27, 2008 - 1 pm - Club - Leadership. This is a huge topic which is a natural extension of our two sessions on Persuasion.

Classes begin on Wednesday, September 3, 2008 but we will continue our sessions at 1 pm, moving to Room 610.

Wednesday, September 3, 2008 - 1 pm - Debate – We’ll discuss our fall plans while SPAR-ing. Everyone seems to find the sessions very exciting.

What happened on August 20 – Debate – SPAR and Shile’s presentation

We were excited to see Drani Gabu return from his cross-country ventures. While he wrote back with this entry:

"It's ok to put those questions on the blog for Club members and visitors to comment on. I found it interesting to be "intellectually cornered" by white folks in this part of the country who have very limited contact with minority populations. When the first question started flying on my face, I developed instantly a plan to lay their fears to rest and win them over instead of going-all-out on offensive because there was resistance and lack of information ( at some quarters). I understand that people are highly sensitive to where you talk from, especially when status dynamics are at play: urban Vs small town, college student Vs real-life-educated, etcetera. Some folks have negative views about affirmative action and reparation to blacks while other white folks do not have the luxuries those in the inner city "enjoy"( ghetto life style). I found myself talking about topics that have negative repercussions and divide the country. Rather than arguing an analyst's view of the adverse impact, I spoke directly to them about my experience in the US and Baker City because real-life stories and testimonies win over abstract speculations. I listened to their views and counter- arguments. I drew up point-by-point responses. I tailored my points to the root drivers of their opposing views, provided valid alternatives to meet their argument and I invited some for beer to advance the debate and enlist support from initially reluctant allies. At the end of two debates, I bridged the degree of separation.
They took me around to see trailer homes at different locations where familys' hopelessness are registered on their faces. I saw the reason why some are indifferent to affirmative action. But some confessed that they voted for Obama in primaries. The dialogue is still continuing. I hope it shall end in a "marriage" of opposing views and understanding."

Your secretary was late because of the computer repair. Before he arrived, Shile had presented his “sales pitch” he was going to give to his church congregation about how wonderful his book was (and please buy it!). I heard the critique was very straight forward and exciting.

Olushile Akintade and Jetante Morris were engaged in a SPAR debate topic “It is easier to catch flies with honey than with vinegar.” Shile took the Affirmative and Jetante took the Negative. Shile told me later he misunderstood the idiomatic English saying and based his interpretation on his Nigerian background. Jetante valiantly tried to counter Shile’s argument, but said later, “I don’t know what I was saying.” The group voted 4-1 for Shile’s Affirmative argument.

The “judges” were Drani Gabu, Lorinda Moore, James Millner, Carlisle Yearwood, David Nussbaum and Richard Green. As usual, Hal Wicke just asked a lot of questions.

Each person made an individual observation of the debate. The comments were helpful.

• Stay on topic.
• Keep focus.
• Organize your thoughts.

All these are wonderful generalizations, but the question is HOW, HOW, HOW???

We need to continue to work hard on the HOW.

James made an interesting observation about when he was debating how he would get off topic by following the lead of the speaker before him. Very easy to do, but difficult to fix. As the driver of a car would do, you keep your eye on the road. If the car in front of you goes into a ditch, you don’t follow. This is the essence of “Defensive Driving” and “Critical Thinking.” With SPAR debate practice, you quickly learn to be an independent thinker.

See you next time. Bring a friend!

Hal Wicke

Touro Communication Club Notes #38
tourocommunicationclub.blogspot.com

If this edition of the club notes seems peculiar, it is because I'm writing it write on the email, not as a Microsoft document. Why? because my computer crashed last Thursday and my resourceful wife, Andrea, has dropped everything to try to repair the situation - without success.

This saga will soon resolve itself when some computer wizard appears to wave his/her magic wand. Just don't hold your breath.

In the meantime, I've been watching too much of the Beijing Olympics, the McCain/Obama interviews by Pastor Rick Warren plus other reading material. (I've also been ironing my shirts, clearing out old files - all this to keep occupied while Andrea was breaking her brains trying to get a handle on this omniscient, omnipresent and seemingly omnipotent bloody virus.)

From the Olympics, you probably observed unusual swimming prowess with Michael Phelps (a new record of 8 medals). He says he just "sleeps, eats and swims." How many people are willing to narrow their focus to basics in order to win Olympic gold? Will you do that for your goal? A challenging question.

From the McCain/Obama interview, it was easy to observe the radically different speaking styles of each candidate. Obama was thoughtful. McCain was crisp. Judging by their applause, the audience seemed to favor McCain. I wonder whether the differing styles of informal speaking will be a factor in how people vote. Again, much to discuss.

A last item strikes a personal note. Obama went home to Honolulu for a week's vacation with his family. The New York Times ran a photo of him and his girls eating "shave ice," an Hawaiian junk food on every street corner analogous to the hot dog carts in Manhattan. That picture was a nostalgic moment for me. But some quarters of the media questions his going to Hawaii as "exotic" and unusual. The ABC reporter Cokie Roberts asked "Why didn't he go to Myrtle Beach (SC) like other Americans? Hawaii is too far away and strange."

I was hurt by the remark. I never thought where I grew up was strange, unusual or exotic. I thought it was normal to grow up in Hawaii since I didn't know any different. A clear culture clash that probably explains, sadly, why Obama has never mentioned his Hawaiian roots or what he absorbed growing up in Hawaii. Oh, what I keep learning.

Here's our schedule: (We are still in Room 615.)

Wednesday, August 20, 2008 - 1 pm - Debate - SPAR, etc. Shile will present his "sales pitch" for his new book.

Wednesday, August 27, 2008 - 1 pm - Club - Leadership. This is a huge topic which is a natural extension of our two sessions on Persuasion.

What happened on August 13 - Club - Persuasion II - A good question! Two and a half hours raced by as the group were engaged in a lively exchange about the strategies that were used and should have been used in the planning of the upcoming student program connected with Student Orientation.

The combattants included Kazi Faltah, Olushile Aktintade, Lorinda Moore, James Millner, Carlisle Yearwood, David Nussbaum, Richard Green and Hal Wicke.

Frankly, I have no notes, other than "Code of Conduct." Hardly representative of the discussion. I'll try to reconstruct the session through a series of bulleted fragments.
Program order
Who should speak and when?
The best way(s) to address student interests
An audience analysis
Who should discuss the Code of Conduct?
Why should students come to this meeting?
Any the hidden agendas?
Relation of Student Orientation program to a "Meet and Greet"
Two meetings or one - will the students come back for a 2nd time?
Timing of event - before Jewish holidays
Publicity - getting the word out
How is this program idea going to persuade freshman students to become involved in Touro?
Will it be boring? Too long? Time limits.
Does the program need rehearsal?
Who will speak for the various majors?
What are the roles for Shile, Lorinda and James?
Is this program really new? The freshman students won't know the difference!
What will be covered in the "Student Life at Touro" presentation?
How does the Communication Club get mentioned?

And on and on. It was a health strategy session, but nothing, unfortunately, was agreed upon. It was almost like a brainstorming session. My only comment is that as a group we need to structure our discussions in a much more focused manner. That is probably the fault of the moderator (Hal) who has conducted them with a free-flowing laissez-faire openness. Exciting, but not terribly useful as a series of concrete outcomes. The group needs to discuss the structure of our exchanges - accidental, loose or with a strict agenda.

Still it was exciting. I wonder whether a stranger could make any sense out of it.

Next time, bring your friends and we'll talk about how we talk about how we talk. Really?

Yup.

Hal Wicke