Touro Communication Club Notes #70

Tourocommunicationclub.blogspot.com

Communication Quote of the Week

“Speak when you are angry and you will make the best speech you will ever regret.”

Ambrose Bierce, a late 19^th century American journalist, short-story writer and satirist who wrote The Devil's Dictionary

This Week: Wednesday, April 29, 2009
2 m Room 314 - Midtown
7th Speech Contest

For the past seven semesters, the Communication department has sponsored a Speech contest which highlights the finalists from three Communication classes: “Survey of Human Communication,” “Public Speaking” and “Interpersonal Communication.” These finalists have been chosen by their classmates to represent them in the Contest. The quality of the performances is consistently rather impressive. Cash prizes await the top three winners chosen by a panel of judges who are made up of Touro faculty, administration and staff. Refreshments are available during the wait for the judges’ decision.

A Note for Communicators:

Strategy: Finding models to emulate.

Tactic: Observe our own and others’ public behavior.

Leadership is an important field of communication. Successful leadership requires effective communication. Lousy communication equals lousy leadership. Communication is the invisible fabric that ties all aspects of an organization together.

In some way each of us is a leader. We start with ourselves: Are we providing good leadership of ourselves? How can we improve our communication with ourselves? During the campaign, President Barack Obama was frequently overheard talking to himself: “I must do better. I must do better.” (Source: New York Times – where else?)

From this corner, President Obama appears to be setting an extraordinary model of leadership, one which I have never witnessed in the dozen Presidents in my lifetime. I keep asking myself: What does Obama’s model demonstrate to a teacher of Communication?

Bottom line: Obama appears to possess the best leadership qualities of our Presidential legacy – and then some.

The first thing that comes to mind is that Obama is really smart. He seems to have a strong intellectual grasp of so many domestic and foreign issues combined with a visceral understanding of how to address them. He seems to have thought long and hard about all that a President faces. His background as a community organizer has given him “on the ground” experience in translating abstractions into reality.

[Digression: I’m not convinced that America has had many really intelligent presidents. All have had some measure of intelligence but that intelligence was colored with other factors. Some have had clear ideologies (FDR. Johnson, Reagan and Bush II). Some have had failed potential (JFK and Bush I). Others have been muddle-headed (Ford and Carter). Still others have been driven by hubris – pride (Nixon and Clinton). The pragmatists have Truman and Eisenhower as their Presidents.]

Secondly, Obama seems to know what he’s doing. He has a plan and he’s executing that plan. Unlike most of his predecessors, Obama did not just hit the ground running on November 3^rd, 2008. He was an immediate avalanche of activity. Executive orders reversing Bush II policies, meetings with the Republicans and governors as well as cabinet appointments shot out of the transition team like 4^th of July fireworks. All before he was inaugurated on January 20^th.

Certainly, the worst global economic disaster in 70 year was fueling much of this behavior. But I would argue that Obama would have behaved similarly even if he had not faced so many domestic and foreign crises.

Thirdly, Obama’s ability to execute his plan, despite several bumps in the road, is a testament to his organizational skills and motivation. Since his inauguration, Obama has moved with alacrity and controversial force on both the domestic economic front while reaching out to the world stage .Obama’s approach to the home-grown problems of the bank and auto bailouts and the forced resignations of Detroit CEOs mesh easily with international meetings of the G8, G20 and meeting of the Latin-American countries. Obama seems to have been everywhere in a short time.

Lastly and most importantly for us as Communicators, Obama possesses a singularly astounding ability to write and speak in an unadorned prose style that is clear and easily understood. His two books and many speeches demonstrate a superb mind at work with a pragmatic sense of how to implement the restoration of the promise of America, lost in last eight years.

Next Wednesday, April 29, is President Obama’s 100^th day in office. This is an artificial milestone invented during the Kennedy era. Past presidents have been given a “Get Out of Jail Free” card during this period when nothing much was expected and the opposition suspended attacks.

Obama has used this “honeymoon” to establish himself as a President with formidable skills to lay the foundation for a hopeful four years. In 100 days, Obama has erased the despair of the previous eight years. We can only pray that America’s future remains secure in the hands of this young leader who had a very thin resume.

UPCOMING CONVERSATIONS:

Upcoming:

May 6 – “The Alabama Experience” – students talk of their recent Civil Rights trip to Alabama

May 13 – “Presenting Jason Alan Carvell” – a conversation with a Touro Communication professor who teaches, acts, directs, sculpts and does television voice-overs.

Tentative: May 20 – “Talking to Women” – an open discussion about what women expect when they talk with men. (A follow up “Talking to Men’ will be scheduled.)

What happened on Wednesday, April 22, 2009 Politics (Conflict) & Communication II

No one who came to this session even realized that Wicke forgot about the announced topic and led the group in a spirited discussion of “Conflict and Communication.” Those who joined the fray included familiar figures Marcus Vyandorf, Meggy Lindsay, James Millner, Brian Brown, Anna Indelicato and Hal Wicke. Three newcomers were welcome additions to the group; Jerusalem Abraham, Alexandra Serebryanikova and Jennie Proano.

Hal wrote several items on the board to start the discussion:

• What is conflict?
• Why is there conflict?
• How do we recognize conf lict?

If we operate on the premise that “People are different,” doesn’t it seem that conflict is inevitable? Unfortunately, many people seem to be surprised when there is conflict. Maybe these people are operating in the bubble of their own world and operate, like good narcissists, that they are the center of the universe. [The current financial meltdown seems to have been led by people who thought they were “Masters of the Universe.”]

If people are different, they automatically are different in every way – different beliefs, different expectations, different experience – all of which lead to different behaviors.

We went around the group identifying situations in which each had had a conflict. Without revealing the details of the conflict, several patterns emerged. External conflicts emerged over

Different methods of doing something – “ wanted to do something my way; the other person wanted to do something his way.”

Different standards of behavior – loud radio playing

Different ways of being treated (also behavior) – “The person was bullying me.”

Family conflicts – parents, siblings

Different definitions of power – “I have the title, I can behave this way.”

Different expectations of recognition – “I expected to be recognized for my work.”

Different attitudes toward survival – “I want a higher standard of living.”

Different views on territory (land and space) – Israel and the Palestinian conflict, subway conflicts, unequal division of space

Different religions and belief systems

Different senses of time – “Island time,” feeling pressured

Different intellectual and physical abilities – society places different values on certain abilities.

Internal conflicts can develop from loss and fear. Hal suggested that we had enough to explore with external conflicts that we could explore internal conflicts at another time.

We asked ourselves what kinds of situations can produce conflict

• External success – grades, money, position, “toys”
• Competition – conflict is built into competition of any kind. A sports conflict is refereed against a set of rules.

Plus the usual suspects of money, power, control, recognition and dozens of others.

Hal observed that the typical class material was developed deductively. We already know the theory as we move from general to specific. Our discussions in the Communication Club try to move inductively – from specific to general, trying to identify patterns from the specifics that are suggested. This approach takes a longer time, but seems to be more satisfying to everyone as we easily notice patterns from the evidence we generate.

We agreed that everyone wants to believe “I am right.” Conflict occurs when “I don’t feel right” or someone is trying to prove me wrong, or bad or inferior. [A natural extension of this dilemma is the negotiation strategy of “Win-Win” from “Getting to Yes” of the Harvard Negotiation Project.]

We also raised the question of balance in a conflict. When one is in a conflict, the mind – and body – are out of balance. And the body seeks “homeostasis.” That’s why when we have too much to drink or do something to the extreme; we are out of balance and feel terrible physically. In a verbal or physical conflict, the “fighters” fight to win to gain internal balance through “winning.” [Much more at another time.]

Someone mentioned the new film, “He Just Not Into You,” a comedy about relationships that go wrong, largely from the female viewpoint. If you haven’t seen it, you might consider looking at it from a Communication viewpoint. The conflict sometimes is not so obvious, but becomes obvious in an unexpected way. The relationships are always asymmetrical and out of balance with the female apparently never in control. (Much more later on this one!]

After 90 minutes, the energy seemed to flag, so Hal asked the Lorinda Question: What did we learn from this discussion? Answers varied in detail, but everyone found the discussion worthwhile.

----

Let’s not forget Carlisle Yearwood’s IDEA several weeks ago. He suggested we develop a 3x4 index card with basic Touro information on it. We’ll talk more about this in the future.

As always, these sessions are open for everyone to attend. Bring a friend and join the excitement. See you next time.

Hal Wicke

Touro Communication Club Notes #69
Tourocommunicationclub.blogspot.com

Communication Quote of the Week

‘The greatest problem of communication is the illusion that it has been accomplished.”

George Bernard Shaw, 20th century playwright, socialist and literary and music critic

Kudos for the Touro Communication Club blog!
Recently Catherine Gaffigan, a Communication instructor who has led our theatre sessions, wrote Hal Wicke that she thought the blog was “Amazing!” Hal asked her to explain.

Catherine wrote back, “The blog is comprehensive and thorough. A myriad of varied and wide-ranging topics are selected and presented {some in depth). It illuminates the endless amount of knowledge which one needs in communication. (A life’s work!) The blog could be the basis for a stand-alone major. Students who attend the meetings are receiving an invaluable supplement to the required course work.”

Thank you as always, Catherine, for your kind words.

Wednesday, April 22, 2009
2 pm –Room 223 - Midtown
Politics & Communication II
Our second session will no doubt generate the sharp interchange of the first. Politics is all around us all the time in every Communication exchange. Much of what “rules” is beneath the surface of the interchange, the “subtext” so to speak.” Many difficulties arise between and among people because they don’t realize or notice the unspoken elements that are operating. We will try to uncover some of these during this session.

A Note for Communicators:

Strategy: Seeing the forest for the trees.
Theme: Closing the gap between rhetoric and reality.

We are surrounded by so much persuasive stimuli in our daily lives – particularly in NYC - that we hardly even know that we are inundated. It feels like everyone is trying to get into our heads and/or our wallets all the time. Someone has estimated that we are hit by some 2 billion stimuli each day. We become numb to the images and sounds around us. We withdraw into the safe world of our iPod. We hear and stare but we don’t see. Are we really listening to the iPod?

It’s almost as if we are suspended in our own heads from the reality around us. We live in our heads. When we do try to communicate, the words transform into monosyllabic reductions as they become text messages.

When it comes to persuasion, the media is always in full bloom. A recent bus advertisement shouted “I AM KING” – a new men’s perfume by Sean John.” PR is a way of life for many people. PR is the mask that covers the reality.

How do we become aware that we are being swamped by persuasion? Perhaps the first step is to even notice that something is out of kilter. Something seems wrong. The technical word for this feeling is “cognitive dissonance.” The words don’t match the experience. I feel a gap inside– something is wrong.

Another strategy is “perceptual checking.” Ernest Hemingway calls it “crap detection.” You hear and see the message. Then you check your solar plexis (below your rib cage) to see if it feels right. If there’s any discomfort, you have probably discovered that something is wrong in the communication.

Becoming aware is like exercising a new muscle. With constant practice, you build an awareness about the authenticity of the communication you send and receive. Pinocchio’s Jiminy Cricket is a good beginning image of awareness. You notice more things. The colors are richer. The sounds are more luscious. The emotional experience is richer. Your head begins to make connections that you never were even aware were possible. You move from the sepia color of Kansas to the Technicolor of Oz.

Once your awareness is turned on, your life becomes transformed. The flamboyant character of Auntie Mame says in both the book and the musical, “Life is a banquet. Look at all these poor people who are starving to death.” Awareness whets the appetite for the banquet that life is.

The great danger of becoming “aware” is that you become cynical and negative. Suddenly, you notice the gap between the rhetoric and reality. Isn’t that awful? That gap will always be there despite your newly discovered “awareness.” The question is what YOU will do with your awareness.

Once you’ve turned on your awareness, it’s very difficult to turn off. The disparity between the fake and the real almost jumps out at you. Bridging that gap is your choice, a choice inside your head. As the vernacular says, you can choose to see the doughnut or the hole.

Perhaps we can go back to “intentions.” What are your intentions when you communicate? In your actions? Keep in mind the old saying, “The road to hell is paved with good intentions.” Use your heightened awareness to check the perceptions of those with whom you communicate.

Predictably, awareness brings the burden of responsibility. We see the gap between rhetoric and reality and choose to close the gap in what we do and what comes out of our mouths. Our next challenge is to work toward bridging the gap.

UPCOMING CONVERSATIONS:

Wednesday, April 29, 2009 - 7th Speech Contest

Upcoming:
May 6 – “The Alabama Experience” – students talk of their recent Civil Rights trip to Alabama

May 13 – “Presenting Jason Alan Carvell” – a conversation with a Touro Communication professor who teaches, acts, directs, sculpts and does television voice-overs.

May 20 – “Talking to Women” – an open discussion about what women expect when they talk with men. (A follow up “Talking to Men’ will be scheduled.)

What happened on Wednesday, April l, 2009 –“What’s Happening to Communication II Pressures & Technology” - Led by James Millner

Gathering to discuss this important topic, this small thoughtful group led by James Millner included Lorinda Moore, Richard Green, Meggy Lindsay, David Nussbaum, Brian Brown and Hal Wicke

James listed many aspects of communication on the board to trigger the discussion. They included technology, video conferencing, teleprompting, SMS messaging, email, voicemail, faxing, telephone, newspapers, computers satellites, fiber optics, Blue Tooth, the Printing Press, video games, Facebook.

His opening question, “What’s the problem?” set off a spirited exchange. “Communication technology is out of control!” There are many mediators (filters) between the person (you) and the source of the message that we are “learning not to care for one another.” These filters influence the information we receive. The mediator takes away the personal aspect of communication.

Communication technology has become smaller and smaller. The first computers filled a huge room. The latest computers are now the size of a hand. Phone communication once required land lines; now signals bounce off satellites. The technology industry is succeeding in its attempt to combine all forms of communication – voice, video, film, computer, recordings, text messaging – into one hand-held device. No doubt, we eventually be able to use the device as a TV clicker to point to the stove to make dinner and the computer to write the term paper.

If we define ideal communication model as a face-to-face exchange between two or more people without mediators, then we have to be aware of how much the mediators can and do change the message. We need to constantly verify the accuracy of the message.

But we don’t. And this is where people get into communication trouble.

In face-to-face communication, “Content is King!” The greatest challenge is to figure out ways to have the users of technology more responsible in their use of content. That is always a difficult issue even under the best of communication situations.

How do we get a handle on the communication situation? Should we create a 1984 “Big Brother is Watching YOU!” situation, building on fear? Tempting, but not wise, we agreed.

Guiding technology toward more responsible use is important. It is not the technology itself that is the problem, it is the people who use the technology. Then we must direct our efforts through education. Parents should be involved. Contact companies who are corporately sensitive to the impact of technology on communication. People need to be made “stakeholders.” In that way, individuals will learn to care.

One of the by-products of technology is that everyone is in a rush. Certainly in New York City! Rush! Rush! Rush! Speed is valued. No one likes to wait. Can you imagine New Yorkers waiting 8 days for a letter to be delivered by pony express? Imagine having to walk to school or take your horse to go shopping? We couldn’t stand it!

The Lorinda Question: What did we learn from this discussion. We have to become aware of the downside aspects of technology. We have to embrace technology. We have to turn technology against itself. “I prefer unfiltered communication.”
----
Let’s not forget Carlisle Yearwood’s IDEA several weeks ago. He suggested we develop a 3x4 index card with basic Touro information on it. We’ll talk more about this in the future.

As always, these sessions are open for everyone to attend. Bring a friend and join the excitement. See you next time.

Hal Wicke

Touro Communication Club Notes #68

Tourocommunicationclub.blogspot.com

Communication Quote of the Week

“What you do speaks so loudly, I cannot hear what you are saying.”

Ralph.Waldo Emerson. 19^th century American essayist, poet and philosopher

Wednesday, April 1, 2009

Room 223 - Midtown

What’s Happening to Communication II Pressures & Technology

Led by James Millner

As always in our Communication Club meetings, everyone has so much to say that often we barely scratch the surface of the topic. The process is important: everyone gets a chance to be heard – hopefully. With a second discussion we need to focus on some of the factors that affect how we communicate. We’ll try to nail down a few influences.

ALERT: The Club will be on “hiatus” on Wednesday, April 8, and April 15 because NYSCAS is on spring vacation.

Dear Communicators:

Strategy: Think Globally, Act locally.

Theme: Communicating from bottom to top to create a tipping point.

What do you do when you disagree with your boss? Or your teacher? Or your parents? Do you shut up and say nothing? Do you make a sarcastic remark? Do you gossip behind their back?

You CAN say anything, can’t you? After all, you have “free speech”? It says so in the Constitution. Then shoot off your mouth. Who cares about consequences? But have you thought of finding productive ways to use that free speech to express your disagreement?

In many organizations, there is often dissatisfaction with the choices that the leadership makes. Look at eight years of President Bush. Look at the broadside attacks President Obama is getting.

What then does an individual do with his/her dissatisfaction? Call him Joe the Plumber (for old times’ sake).

Joe has several options:

• He can remain silent and do or say nothing.
• He can hold his anger, let it build up and then explode at a little old lady for bumping into him.
• He can complain about the decision behind the backs of the leaders.
• He can put blinders on and narrow the focus on his job to focus on what is in front of him and ignore the context in which he is working.
• He can begin to slack off on his job because he doesn’t think his superiors won’t listen to him.
• He can write a letter to his boss. (See “Dear A.I.G., I quit!” Op-Ed page New York Times, Wednesday, March 26, 2009. It’s a beauty!)
• He can get accidentally interviewed by Candidate Obama and become an instant celebrity representing the little guy.

Consider another option? Could Joe the Plumber begin to think about ways that he can make small changes in his larger organization. In the 60’s, now enshrined in warm memories, there was a concept called, “Think Globally, Act Locally.” Take the larger concepts of a mission of change and apply them to the situation you are in.

Sounds pretty vague, doesn’t it? Perhaps. But figure out what is bugging you. (Now that’s a job for a lifetime!) Talk to others to clarify your ideas. Formulate a plan. Remember the self-help bromide, “Inch by inch is a cinch; yard by yard is hard.”

Change starts with your beliefs. The beliefs of every individual do matter. When these beliefs are turned into a series of small productive actions, the climate is set for change. The build-up continues until it reaches a tipping point. Malcolm Gladwell has written a highly popular book, "The Tipping Point," which documents how change occurs.

Change begins with communication. The nature of communication is to reach out to others, particularly to those with whom you disagree. Reaching out is the mantra of an effective Communicator. You meet new people. You learn new things. You get exposed to different beliefs. You begin to see commonalities. The “comm” in “Communication” refers to “common,”“community,” “communion.” Finding a thread that transcends differences and brings people and ideas together.

Is this foolish idealism? Perhaps, for those who have never tried to “Communicate.” But for those of us whose interest in Communication is more than party small talk, this idealism is merely a mission statement toward creating a productive reality.

As motivational writer Napoleon Hill has written, “What you conceive, and believe, you can achieve.” Change may be slow, but tenacious persistence transforms dreams into reality. Hang in there. Keep your eye on the prize.

UPCOMING CONVERSATIONS:

Wednesday, April 22, 2009

Politics & Communication II

Wednesday, April 29, 2009

7^th Speech Contest

What happened on Wednesday, Wednesday, March 25, 2009 – Theatre IV – Using Your Voice Effectively

This week’s intrepid group Carlisle Yearwood, Charles Mason, James Millner, Lorinda Moore, and Hal Wicke.

Hal made the observation that this session was “training” rather than ‘education.” Where our typical discussions about ideas which people have about a topic, this session focused on specific skills useful for the voice.

Hal described how the voice was placed forward in the mouth when English was spoken. Then he listed the various types of vowel and consonant sounds. Next the group followed Richard Green’s ESL handout explaining when consonants were in the medial (middle) and final positions of a word and were dropped

Then the instruction focused on the breath (excitor), vocal cords/larynx (vibrator) and resonators of the mouth, throat and nasal passages. The six articulators were then identified – tongue, tips, teeth, hard palate, soft palate and alvealor (gum) ridge. The group demonstrated various sounds which were accurate when properly articulated and what happened to the sound when it wasn’t.

The next section was amusing for the group when they worked on various tongue twisters designed to highlight the importance of articulation. “Rubber Baby Buggy Bumpers.” “Theophilus thistle the successful thistle sifter…’ “Peter Piper picked a peck of pickled peppers.

Finally, the group focused on a Department handout on the various aspects of vocal production Volume, Rate, Pitch, Timbre and Variety.

The group energy began to flag after a serious 90 minutes of concentration. There is much more to build on in the development on the voice, particularly in breathing. Now that the group has a basic skill vocabulary, we can explore a number of other vocal areas.

----

Let’s not forget Carlisle Yearwood’s IDEA several weeks ago. He suggested we develop a 3x4 index card with basic Touro information on it. We’ll talk more about this in the future.

As always, these sessions are open for everyone to attend. Bring a friend and join the excitement. See you next time.

Hal Wicke

Touro Communication Club Notes #67

Tourocommunicationclub.blogspot.com

Communication Quote of the Week

"Judge a man by his questions rather than by his answers."

Voltaire, 18^th century French philosopher.

Wednesday March 25, 2009

2 pm - Room 223 - Midtown

Theatre IV – Using Your Voice Effectively

Thus far, we have focused on basic acting tools- breathing, sense memory, emotional recall and improvisation. Although we are far from finished in identifying more basic acting tools, we need to introduce working with your voice. Like the body, the voice is a major part of the actor’s instrument. Being aware of the capabilities of the speaking voice, very different from the singing voice, can give the Communicator another range of options in delivering the message.

Dear Communicators:

Strategy: Finding the universal in the particular.

Theme: Entitlement is reflected in Communication

An important Communication question is raised with the national outrage over the $218 million in bonuses paid to 400 employees by American International Group (AIG) from the government’s TARP money. Claimed to be required by prior contract , these super people were entitled to these large checks.

Entitlement is a growing phenomenon in our society. Some examples include:

• “AIG is too big to fail.” (Therefore, AIG deserves a bailout.)
• The AIG bonuses were justified as being given to retain excellent employees. Ironically, after receiving the bonuses, a large number of employees jumped ship to other companies.
• Recently, the Detroit CEO’s for GM, Chrysler and Ford flew to Washington in their corporate jets to ask Congress for bailout money.
• Students who feel entitled to an “A” just for coming t o class. “The default grade is A ‘Student Expectations cause Grade Disputes.”.” (New York Times, 2.17.09)
• Extraordinary compensation for “sports stars” that don’t perform- Alex Rodriguez, among other professional athletes.
• The status of a “rock star” whether in music or not.

To be entitled implies to be deserving of whatever rewards you desire and to demonstrate that entitlement in many ways. If you are rich, you are entitled to the perks of being rich. If you are beautiful or handsome, you are entitled to the attention you receive. If you are powerful, you are entitled to obedience.

Verbal and non-verbal communication strategies often betray a sense of entitlement. Clothes, jewelry, vacations and an entourage are some external manifestations of entitlement. Verbal cues often come from how many names or places you casually drop in conversation or certain special topics or events you say you attended.

Entitlement creates a narcissism in which everything is about “Me.” Attitudes tell the world that “I am the center of the world and everyone is my subject.” Of course, this is an exaggeration to the point of being a cartoon stereotype. However, there are elements of the cartoon that appear in many people.

When you discover “narcissism” and “entitlement” together in a human being, you find someone with whom it is difficult to talk. As in a play by Anton Chekhov, the early 20^th century Russian playwright, people talk in parallel worlds, alternating noises but never connecting. Narcissistic entitlement creates separate worlds which are isolated from one another. If I am a superior being, then everyone is subordinate to me. Ultimately there is NO communication, just an exchange of noises we are duped into thinking as conversation.

The characters of Samuel Beckett, Harold Pinter and David Mamet do not communicate because of their narcissistic self-absorption. The master of human isolation is Chekhov whose characters do not know how to communicate.

If entitlement separates, its opposite is egalitarian interchange – everyone is a human being, each of us has strengths and challenges, each of us is on an individual journey, and each of us needs the help and good will of others to survive and to thrive. The root of communication is “coming together” – community, communion, common.

If we are to believe John Donne, “No Man is an Island…” But there are certainly some people who behave as if their island is superior to all others.

UPCOMING CONVERSATIONS:

Wednesday, April 1, 2009

What’s Happening to Communication II Pressures & Technology

Led by James Millner

As always in our Communication Club meetings, everyone has so much to say that often we barely scratch the surface of the topic. The process is important: everyone gets a chance to be heard – hopefully. With a second discussion we need to focus on some of the factors that affect how we communicate. We’ll try to nail down a few influences.

The Club will be on “hiatus” on Wednesday, April 8, and April 15 because NYSCAS is on spring vacation.

Wednesday, April 22, 2009

Politics & Communication II

Wednesday, April 29, 2009

7^th Speech Contest

What happened on Wednesday, Wednesday, March 11, 2009 - “Politics and Communication”

This group of debaters was extremely willing to undergo the severe challenges of SPAR Debate. They included: Carlisle Yearwood, Egypt Allen, Charles Mason, Markus Vayndorf, James Millner, Lorinda Moore, Drani Gabu, Brian Brown and Hal Wicke.

The topic “Honesty is always the best policy” was the first to draw blood. The 4 teams divided as follows:

PRO: CON:
Drani Marcus (W)

Charles Egypt (W)

Lorinda Carlisle (W)

Carlisle (T) Brian (T)

The group found several of the debates difficult to decide, but finally chose one side. Interestingly, all but one debate was won by the Negative side. Perhaps the operative word “always” seems to confound the Affirmative side.

After the vote, each person commented on the strengths and weaknesses of each debate. The debaters then commented on their own performance. Each person seemed to gain something from the experience. People have become used to the pressure of the time limit and thinking on your feet.

The group was overwhelmed when Carlisle quoted from John Milton’s “Paradise Lost” to support his Affirmative position. The classic strategy of one-upmanship to derail your opponent.

Brian commented that he was prepared to argue both sides. In his mind he had thought how to flip his arguments depending on which side of the issue he received after the coin toss.

During the early debriefings, people commented that they were voting for the position, rather than how well the PRO or CON side presented its case. This is always the reality of any debate, particularly in Congress or in the Supreme Court.

Knowing this, lawyers will make sure that part of their briefs will contain tidbits for various judges or members of Congress. In a larger context, lawyers will use the propaganda device of “card stacking’ to make sure certain people know of their positions.

In the remaining time, the group had a spirited round table discussion over the two topics on the blackboard: It was clear that everyone was aware of the context of both topics and had sufficient confidence and knowledge to discuss them.

1. President Truman was correct in his decision to drop the atomic bomb on Japan.

2. AIG was correct to pay $218 in bonuses.

Let’s not forget Carlisle Yearwood’s IDEA several weeks ago. He suggested we develop a 3x4 index card with basic Touro information on it. We’ll talk more about this in the future.

As always, these sessions are open for everyone to attend. Bring a friend and join the excitement. See you next time.

Hal Wicke

Touro Communication Club Notes #66

Tourocommunicationclub.blogspot.com

New feature: Communication Quote of the Week:
“We will never have peace in the world until we learn how to communicate with people with whom we disagree.” Pete Seeger, American folksinger and civil rights activist.

Word is Getting Around: The Touro Communication Blog and our weekly discussions have been noticed by Halifax University and at least three Touro faculty members.

Wednesday, March 18, 2009

Room 223 - Midtown SPAR Debate IV - Thinking on your feet

Is is possible that we’ve not scheduled a SPAR Debate session since before the election? Now let’s see if we can move from aphorisms to public policy issues. Spouting your beliefs is easy compared to taking the opposite position and arguing something you do believe in. This kind of exercise allows you to anticipate people who have different ideas from yours. We are going to raise the bar on the content of the arguments, the reasoning and the evidence we use.

Dear Communicators:

Theme: Finding the Universal in the Particular.

An interesting article in the Friday, March 13th of The New York Times, buried on page 6, led me to reflect on another aspect of communication: What happens to communication when a person or a group of people are isolated from the larger society?

The headline, “Pope Admits online News Can Provide Infallible Aid,” described the situation that Pope Benedict XVI found himself in when an Internet posting proved him wrong. The Pope had “not known” that a Bishop, excommunicated by Pope John Paul II for making Holocaust-denying statements, had made these statements and had revoked the excommunication.

Despite “an avalanche of protests” from around the world, the Pope indicated that he would not back down from his reinstatement of the Bishop. The NY Times article reports the Pope as saying, “Was it, and is it, truly wrong in this case to meet halfway the brother who ‘has something against you’ and to seek reconciliation?”

Clearly, that gesture might be debatable in many quarters. But the incident marks at least two startling comments in the 2000 year history of the Roman Catholic Church, according to the Times. The first is that the Pope “admitted that the Vatican had made ‘mistakes’ in handling the case of a Holocaust denying bishop.” The letter was “unprecedented in its directness, its humanity and its acknowledgment of paper fallibility,” The Times wrote.

The second comment was “unique” in Vatican history. The Pope wrote, “I have been told that consulting the information on the internet would have made it possible to perceive the problem early on.” The Times quipped, “Note to the Roman Curia; try Google.” With the Pope’s statement, The Time editorialized, “The Vatican, a 2000-year-old monarchy…and run by octogenarians, has officially acknowledged the 24-hour news cycle, not a 24-century one.”

From our Communication purposes, the article acknowledges the isolation the Vatican – or any organization, group or individual, has from the larger world. The Pope disputes this view, saying in the article, “We don’t live on the moon.”

In our increasingly fast-moving world of communication technologies, isolation from changes is a mixed bag, but the quality of our communication is affected regardless of our position. The more skilled we become at communicating, the more we are forced at climbing out of the “ghettos” of our minds.

Since the world of information has been exploding exponentially in the last 25 years, we cannot hope to know everything. However we can look for patterns – finding the universal in the particular is one – which will give us continuing insight into the information chaos around us. [Some people might call this ‘Critical Thinking.”]

UPCOMING CONVERSATIONS:

Wednesday March 25, 2009

Theatre IV – Using Your Voice Effectively
Thus far, we have focused on basic acting tools- breathing, sense memory, emotional recall and improvisation. Although we are far from finished in identifying more basic acting tools, we need to introduce working with your voice. Like the body, the voice is a major part of the actor’s instrument. Being aware of the capabilities of the speaking voice, very different from the singing voice, can give the Communicator another range of options in delivering the message.

Wednesday, April 1, 2009

What’s Happening to Communication II – Pressures & Technology –

Led by James Millner
As always in our Communication Club meetings, everyone has so much to say that often we barely scratch the surface of the topic. The process is important: everyone gets a chance to be heard – hopefully. With a second discussion we need to focus on some of the factors that affect how we communicate. We’ll try to nail down a few influences.

What happened on Wednesday, Wednesday, March 11, 2009 - “Politics and Communication”
The enthusiastic group included Richard Green, Carlisle Yearwood, Brian Brown, Charles Mason, Lorinda Moore, James Millner, Drani Gabu, Anna Indelicato and Hal Wicke.

Hal asked for a definition of “politics.” The group concluded that the word had something to do with interactions between and among people from its Greek root “polis” meaning city or state. They agreed that since people are involved in every communication situation – intimate, personal interpersonal, at work, and, of course, at City Hall, Albany and Washington DC.

Hal suggested three premises that are fundamental to all politics:

• All people are different.
• Most people want the same or similar things/ goals.
• People have different ways of achieving their goals.

There are many factors create conflict in communication, such as

• Space
• Money
• Power
• Status/Pride/Privilege
• Time
• Respect
• Affections

Emotions begin to dominate an interchange when people dig into their positions.

It was at this point that the discussions expanded into the many political situations which have or are going out of control:

• The global economy
• The desperate political situations in many African countries (Zimbabwe, Sudan, Congo, etc), the Middle East (Israel, Palestine, Iran, Iraq, Syria) and East Asian countries (Afghanistan, Pakistan, India)
• The 2000 U.S. Election
  

A scene in the film, "Recount," highlighted two tactics of the 2000 election. The Democratic/Warren Christopher tactic was a high-minded academic rules-oriented approach. The Republican/James Baker tactic was to wage a street fight.

Carlisle commented on the power of the street vs. the power of the police. When you win in the street, you win in the police precinct. When you don’t win in the street, you don’t win in the precinct.

The exciting discussion continued with the details of the specifics of many anecdotal experiences. All stories were fascinating and kept attention at a peak.

Hal tried, unsuccessfully, to observe that the group was lost in specifics. The only thing, he said to himself, that was different about the discussion in Room 223 and a bar room was beer. [Hal promised to himself to inject a communication principle of “Finding the universal in the specific.” More later.]

Hal mention the 1975 book ‘Getting to Yes” from the founders of the Harvard Negotiation Project. The book was influential in guiding President Jimmy Carter’s Middle East negotiations with Egyptian President Anwar Sadat and Israel’s Menachem Begin. The book lists three positions that conflicting opponents can take:

• Win/Win
• Win/Lose
• Lose/Lose

We will revisit these ideas when we next return to Negotiation .Part II

We also need to explore ways to identify emotions and guide them productively when in the midst of a difficult situation.

Another source for analysis: Brian mentioned an HBO film, “Right America: Feeling Wronged – Some Voices from the campaign trail” by filmmaker Alexandra Pelosi [Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi’s daughter].

Each one of these sessions just further confirms, at least for me, the wide-ranging impact of Communication on virtually every aspect of our lives.

Let’s not forget Carlisle Yearwood’s IDEA several weeks ago. He suggested we develop a 3x4 index card with basic Touro information on it. We’ll talk more about this in the future.

As always, these sessions are open for everyone to attend. Bring a friend and join the excitement. See you next time.

Hal Wicke

Touro Communication Club Notes #65

Tourocommunicationclub.blogspot.com

This Week!

Wednesday, March 11, 2009

“Politics and Communication”

When two people get together, there are “politics.” Politics occur at every level human interaction – personal, family, workplace, governmental, international. Politics include the many elements and levels of human interchange. We’ll try to identify some aspects of

the politics of human interchange.

Dear Communicators:

An Op-Ed piece on Monday, March 2, 2009,”Japan’s Crisis of the Mind” by Masaru Tamamoto, set off Communication bells in my head. Culture is an important area to examine in Communication.

Simplistically described, culture is more than the different food, music and costumes of various groups of people. The firecrackers and the theatrical dragon whipping through New York City’s first Chinatown are only symbols of an enormously rich culture and value system.

Culture includes how a group of people relate to each other, their beliefs, attitudes and values as well as their responses to gender differences and the power. Tamamoto’s essay is a hard-hitting examination of the Japanese culture and its impact on its place in the world.

Tamamoto is a Senior Fellow at the World Policy Institute and seems to be taking an uncharacteristically “Japanese” view of his own country. Among the statements he makes in the well-reasoned piece is that “Japan is a mess.” It is a “nation of bureaucrats.” The crisis “is not political, but psychological.”

Tamamoto writes, “Since the middle of the 19^th century, our [Japan’s] economic success has relied on the availability of outside models from which to choose” [to imitate]. Where the West offered “progress based on establishing individual autonomy and liberty….In Japan, bureaucratic rule offered security and predictability – in exchange for personal freedom.”

As Tamamoto continued his negative attack on his native country, I began to wonder how the world viewed the U.S. in light of this traumatic transition from the culture of Bush to Obama. The world has seen America seeming reverse an 8 year course in the space of less that 50 days. Are Obama’s optimistic plans to reverse the financial disaster failing America and, by extension, the world going to be undermined by the nay-sayers. Senator John McCain has officially declared himself “the loyal opposition,” taking from the British tradition of acknowledging different, yet loyal, points of view.

What messages do President Obama’s efforts communicate to America? The world? Does Rush Limbaugh represent the “loyal opposition?” And ultimately, can we disagree without being entirely disagreeable? Sometimes, I wonder. We may have our own views, but what messages do we send to the world, as Japan, one of the world’s economic powers, sending to the world?

We almost have to overdose on critical thinking skills to gain some kind of equilibrium in this increasingly chaotic environment. Maybe Michael Jackson’s return will be our momentary escape.

UPCOMING CONVERSATIONS:

Wednesday, March 18, 2009

SPAR Debate – Thinking on your feet

Let’s see if we can move from aphorisms to public policy issues. Spouting your beliefs is easy compared to taking the opposite position and arguing something you do believe in. This kind of exercise allows you to anticipate people who have different ideas from yours.

Wednesday March25, 2009

Theatre IV – Using Your Voice Effectively

Thus far, we have focused on basic acting tools- breathing, sense memory, emotional recall and improvisation. Although we are far from finished in identifying more basic acting tools, we need to introduce working with your voice. Like the body, the voice is a major part of the actor’s instrument. Being aware of the capabilities of the speaking voice, very different from the singing voice, can give the Communicator another range of options in delivering the message.

What happened on Wednesday, March 4, 2009 “Writing a Letter to President Obama”

Letter writers included Carlisle Yearwood, Egypt Allen, Marcus Vayndorf, Charles Mason, Brian Brown, James Millner, Lorinda Moore, Drani Gabu and Hal Wicke

Hal wrote on the blackboard what we had agreed to in our previous letter writing session.

1. This letter represents to views and opinions of the students and faculty of the Touro Communication Club. [We discussed whether we were representing Touro College. Hal responded that we were writing on behalf of the people in the room on this day. He said that when we were finished with the letter, he would run it by certain administrative personnel to apprise them of our efforts. Such actions are important since the club is part of Touro College and, as I noted on the blog, an official outreach effort of the SGS Department of Speech and Communication.]

2. We endorse your efforts as Commander-in-Chief to turn the country around. [I think we can elaborate on this.]

Someone suggested that we take our cue from President Obama’s speech last week to a Joint Session of Congress. His three topics were the economy, health care and education. Clearly, education is very important to us at Touro.

For topic 3, the discussion thought “To implement educational models which stimulate student learning.” Among these included

• A revised version of “No Child Left Behind” to read “No Student Left Behind”
• Establish programs to develop qualified teachers K-college.
• Create a comprehensive universal program for developing student skills
• A Discovery program for students who want to go to college but do not have the necessary skills.
• Create Student/Teacher Award programs recognizing the impact that teachers have on their students.
• Develop a community service program which encourages college students to get into the community using their skills in tutoring, serving as Big Brother/Big Sister, aiding those citizens to achieve a better life.

Although the discussion was contentious at times, there was a general sense of good will as we hashed out our idea. Clearly, the second session was more productive than the first because we got to know each other better and were more focused in achieving our outcome.

The Communication Club regulars (those in this session plus a couple of others) are beginning to develop the early characteristics of a unified group, willing to set aside our differences to focus on a common goal.

Ah, there’s a light at the end of the Communication tunnel!

Let’s not forget Carlisle Yearwood’s IDEA several weeks ago. He suggested we develop a 3x4 index card with basic Touro information on it. We’ll talk more about this in the future.

As always, these sessions are open for everyone to attend. Bring a friend and join the excitement. See you next time.

Hal Wicke

Touro Communication Club Notes #64:

This Week!
Wednesday, March 4. 2009 – Room 223 - Midtown

“Writing President Obama II”
This Week!

Wednesday, March 4. 2009 – Room 223 - Midtown “Writing President Obama II”
Much will have transpired in Washington since our first conversation about writing to President Obama. More issues will surface, but the process of arriving at agreement remains the same. Since we are focusing on a real document that we will eventually send to the President, we are automatically engaged in the fundamental process of democracy – finding agreement amidst disagreement.

In President Obama’s address to the Joint Session of Congress on Tuesday, February 24, he recognized Ty’Sheoma Bethea, an eighth-grader at J.V. Martin Junior High School in Dillon, S.C., in the gallery and quoted from her letter which sought improvements at her rundown school “We are not quitters,” wrote Ty'Sheoma.

Here is Ty’Sheoma’s letter, a fragmented reconstruction of from of number of sources.

“Dear Congress of the United States:
People are starting to see my school as a hopeless, uneducated school which we are not…We are just students trying to become lawyers, doctors, congressmen like yourself and one day president, so we can make a change to not just the state of South Carolina, but also the world....We finally want to prove to the world that we have a chance in life just like other schools, and we can feel good about what we are doing, because of the conditions we are in now we can not succeed in anything. We are not quitters."

In his address, President Obama said, "These words tell us something about the spirit of the people who sent us here. They tell us that even in the most trying times, amid the most difficult circumstances, there is a generosity, resilience, decency, and a determination that perseveres,” he said. At that, the audience rose to give the teenager a standing ovation

Obama had visited J.V. Martin JHS as a presidential candidate in August 2007 and returned again last year, each time pronouncing himself appalled by the conditions he found there.

"He said back then, 'No matter what happens, I will not forget you,' " said Principal Amanda Burnette.”And he proved this week that he remembered us."

Students and teachers at the school well remember the moment when Obama, standing on the buckled floorboards of the 1926-era gymnasium where teachers must spread eight trash cans to catch the leaking water whenever it rains, nailed a perfect 3 point 2 basket.
Ty’Sheoma is an inspiration for our own letter to President Obama.

Dear Communicators:

The news continues to be filled with stories that have communication implications. Here are three stories from the New York Times on Friday in which “perception” dominates:

· A Catholic bishop denies the Holocaust, is excommunicated and gives a hollow apology.
· The New York Post editor and publisher apologize limply for the “chimp” cartoon last week.
· A new book by three fellow prisoners disputes the valiant portrait of Isabel Betancourt, a Columbian politician, who was rescued in a spectacular rescue mission.
· In order to attract buyers, NYC upscale real estate brokers are changing their advertising language from “prestige” to “value” in the disastrous financial market

Playing with words and images can be dangerous double-edged swords for the communicator. Whether you are creating a perception (the cartoon and advertising) or reacting to your perception of an event (the Catholic bishop and the Columbian politician), a kind of “Rashomon” effect is created. (In his 1950 film, Japanese filmmaker Akira Kurosawa dramatized four versions of an incident, each of them different.)

Who are we to believe? Our own perception? Another person’s perception? The media’s perception? My observation: All of them are “true” and filters of each person’s experience. All of them merit some consideration in creating a composite of any experience. Most communication difficulties begin when one person insists that his/her perception is the only one or, perhaps, the most accurate or “true” one.

Now that is a discussion that won’t end!

UPCOMING CONVERSATIONS:

Wednesday, March 11, 2009
“Politics and Communication”
When two people get together, there are “politics.” Politics occur at every level human interaction – personal, family, workplace, governmental, international. Politics include the many elements and levels of human interchange. We’ll try to identify some aspects of the politics of human interchange.

Wednesday, March 18, 2009
SPAR Debate – Thinking on your feet
Let’s see if we can move from aphorisms to public policy issues. Spouting your beliefs is easy compared to taking the opposite position and arguing something you do believe in. This kind of exercise allows you to anticipate people who have different ideas from yours.

What happened on Wednesday, February 25, 2009?
“Handling Conflict”
Hal Wicke began by explaining some basic terms of our conversation on conflict. Dutiful listeners included Lorinda Moore, Meggy Lindsay, Egypt Allen Drani Gabu, Brian Brown, Geovanny Leon and Anna Indelicato. Charles Mason, Carlisle Yearwood and Marcus Vayndorf joined in the middle of the discussion.

Suddenly a group of students from Professor Jose Dunker’s class on Civil Rights began to pour into the room. They included Georgia Brown, Prania Rai, Rina Thapaliya, Ravi Patel, Minjur Tunca, Abayomi Aderiyi, Marie Delmas, Maritza Estrella, Cedric Flemming, Jazzment Campbell, Frankie Eloi, Cartier Greely, Grace Gibson, Rajitha Roy, and George Goodwine

A total of 27 people attended this session, topping our previous record of 15 people.

Hal had written on the blackboard:
What is conflict?
How do you recognize conflict?
What causes conflict?
What are some strategies to address conflict?
Some sources of conflict
Inside oneself
Other people
“Mother Nature”
God – G-d
Cognitive dissonance - noticing a conflict
Perceptual checking – “crap detecting”
Stereotypical thinking – black and white interpretations

The topic of conflict is big and endless in the many ways it occurs. We chose not to focus on conflict inside oneself and conflicts with God/G-d because they were too complex for this kind of beginning discussion. Conflicts with “Mother Nature” were impossible to overcome, but we still had to prepare them.

Conflicts with other people are a frequent occurrence. The group suggested that conflict arises when two or more people disagree over something or someone. People were not clear on how they recognized conflict, except to say that they felt uncomfortable or perhaps ultimately angry when they experienced conflict.

We began to focus on the elements of conflicts with other people when Professor Dunker’s class arrived. Hal repeated much of the material for them.

Someone raised the controversial February 18th New York Post cartoon where two white policemen are shown shooting a monkey, saying, “They’ll have to find someone else to pass the next stimulus bill.” Immediately, the opinions were flying: Among the principal comments were:
It was racist.
It was intentional.
It was aimed at President Obama.
It was offensive and hurtful.
Al Sharpton was a leader in a demonstration against the Post.
It continues stereotypical thinking.
The apology by the Post was weak and inadequate.
The cartoonist should be fired.

For nearly an hour, the rapid exchange of opinions continued. There were other comments as well, but the majority of them focused on the cartoon. Unfortunately, Professor Dunker’s class had to leave so the discussion came to an end.

After the class left, the remaining group – club members - commented on the differences between their kinds of comments and those of the class. All of the comments were emotionally based. Clearly the regular members of the club were more at ease in expressing their opinions.

For the Civil Rights class there was some reticence at the beginning, but several were willing to mix it up. It was the first time they had explored the communication impact of an event (the cartoon). The club members agreed that with more discussion experience, the Civil Rights class would begin to approach a controversial issue with some emotional distance.

The discussion was a wonderfully unexpected experience with many facets. Everyone was learning at some level. We hope the Civil Rights class will return!

Let’s not forget Carlisle Yearwood’s IDEA several weeks ago. He suggested we develop a 3x4 index card with basic Touro information on it. We’ll talk more about this in the future.

As always, these sessions are open for everyone to attend. Bring a friend and join the excitement. See you next time.

Hal Wicke