You are on page 1of 6

Judith Malveaux Persuasion Im excited about learning about techniques to persuade people to do things or believe things.

For the last six years I have been working to communicate with employees about the news, changes and events of Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools. Its been quite a learning experience to figure out when and how to best communicate information. What has been most frustrating in my job is realizing that leadership in the district wants employees to hear and heed their messages and information, but they have, for the most part, been unwilling to allow employees to participate in decision-making processes or see how decisions evolve to the point that they are when we begin to communicate them. I think employees would be more engaged and more receptive to receiving information if they felt some ownership of it, but, as my leadership seems to undervalue internal communications, decisions are made and then thought is given to how we will let employees know. I find it odd when leadership then becomes frustrated that messages arent received or are misunderstood. Top-down decisions rarely have good penetration, especially with a disengaged workforce that suffers from low morale. Perhaps Ill be able to make a stronger case for internal communication improvements through this course. -I think Im officially grossed out by the popcorn-eating experiment mentioned in chapter 1 of Switch. Its not so much that people continued to eat stale, popcorn based on the size of the container it was in as much as realizing that I have acted in a similarly ridiculous fashion at least a time or two that I can recall. Its amazing to think that people unknowingly fall victim to such simple tactics. So often we think that were above or immune to those things, especially if, like me, you have a media background and believe you have a deeper understanding of the different methods used to trick people into taking an action or buying a product. In fact, when I was in elementary school, we used to play a game called Propaganda that I was particularly good at (if I do say so myself). In Propaganda, a person would recite wording from a commercial or some other form of marketing and you would have to guess which method of propaganda was used in it. There were things like repetition, folksy appeal and, my personal favorite, passing from the acceptable to the dubious. I recognized that technique being used in a series of commercials from DirecTV recently. They start talking about what you would do when youre waiting for your cable to work, waiting on the phone with your cable company or having some other negative experience involving cable. Actions degenerate from there until a person is re-enacting Platoon scenes with Charlie Sheen, unconscious in a roadside ditch or growing a beard as a recluse who is also collecting stray animals. The premise is to avoid these things by switching from cable. Its funny how reading this book has made me think more and more about Propaganda and how, as a kid, I never considered these techniques being used every day to see me things. Now, I know better, but, according to the book, not that much better. -We had an interesting discussion on Super Bowl commercials in class. I admit, as I sat watching them, I considered the techniques used. But, to be honest, with little exception, I was unmoved. I actually like

only two commercials, one of which has now become a center of controversy. It was from GMAC and talked about it being halftime in America. It played during the halftime of the Super Bowl and was narrated by Clint Eastwood, which always adds a badass element to things. I thought the commercial was pretty powerful, but the presence of Clint Eastwood made me feel like it might have a conservative leaning that I didnt initially pick up on. I guess I was completely wrong. It seems those who maybe read too much into Super Bowl commercials found it way left and a quiet endorsement of the Obama Administration. Thats because they see the Obama Administration as having given the automakers the millions needed for the company to stay afloat. Well, that actually happened under Bush, so I was unclear on how that connection was made, but it was. I think sometimes people get more upset about controversies because they are watching or experiencing them through a lens that frames things in a way that suites their own predilections and prejudices. Hundreds of years ago, slave owners in America could read the Holy Bible and conclude that they had a biblical entitlement to enslave Africans and treat them, at best, like property and not like people. Anyway, my point is this: People can get out of anything what they want to if they view it from the right vantage point. I recall how controversial Tim Tebows commercial with his mother was before last years Super Bowl. People acted as if it was a glaring antiabortion ad that needed to be pulled from the air. When I saw it, I thought it was cute and pretty harmless. But, I do admit that I am pro-life, so I cant say everyone would see it that way. Maybe the GMAC commercial was meant to endorse the current administration, maybe it wasnt. What I took away from the controversy was that, days after it had aired, people were still talking about it that cant be too bad for the brand. -Last night my Persuasion class visited Charlotte Center City Partners to discuss a campaign that encourages people to not give to panhandlers, but rather to give those panhandlers information about the various services available within the community. They justify this idea by saying that giving money to a panhandler doesnt create real change, but the other community programs can. Great justification, in my mind. Then they talked some more and killed my support. One of the speakers spent a great deal of time explaining that many of the panhandlers are not really homeless and do this as their job, so you should not give to them. He further stated that panhandling was illegal, so it should not be supported. The speakers went so far as to say, in essence, if you give them money, they will keep coming back. That, first of all, made me feel like they were equating these panhandlers with animals like dogs or feral cats that would raise such concerns. I have a problem with reducing human beings to such contentions and speaking about them the way you would an everyday street animal. Sadly, that was not the most offensive part of the discussion for me. Ill talk about that later. I was struck by how, as the conversation progressed, I began to feel like it was an us versus them theme that emerged in their presentation. I respect who they are and what they do, but I felt as though someone like they didnt really take into account that they would have done better to persuade us with a strong and positive message about helping these people. I dont know if that makes me a bleeding heart and I have not been accused of being liberal in a while, but I think would have responded to as message presented as more of a community building instead of a lets rid ourselves of these problems, who also happen to be people.

-So, let me revisit our trip to Charlotte Center City Partners. As a Christian, I have been taught to be careful how you treat everyone that you meet because you may be entertaining angels unaware. Needless to say, I have been known to pass a buck or two to a panhandler, not concerned about whether the person was truly homeless. The assertion that most of these people are liars didnt resonate with me. In fact, it offended me because I am being told to assume the person is a liar and not assist him or her. I cannot do that. But, as a Christian, the idea of making lasting change in a persons life appealed to me, as did the conversation we had about being almost six years into a 10-year plan to end homelessness in Charlotte. I was also concerned that such seasoned communications professionals could create marketing materials that would lack appeal to Milllennials and Gen Xers. Millennials, from what I have read, respond better to clear direction, which the posters lacked, and was heavy on words, which also does not appeal to the shorter attention span. I dont understand the rationale. As a Gen Xer, I want the information to make a decision quickly and I want a reason that appeals to me and who I am. The poster doesnt do that, either. Instead, way down in the bottom right corner is a teeny, tiny logo for Urban Ministries next to an equally miniscule logo for the Mens Shelter. The wording on the poster was long and didnt tell me how I can give an alternative to helping a panhandler. I would walk past it without a second thought, rejecting the idea of just not giving. I suggested they make the poster shorter on words, like Make lasting change. And highlight the places that can really help. I also suggested using the formerly homeless when presenting their message as they could directly speak to how real change is made but I was told that sometimes leads those people back into a lifestyle that led to their homelessness. Another student suggested then that they use them in videos and other media that would not include having to speak in front of an audience. -We had an interesting discussion about the Republican presidential primary. I have to admit, I find it fascinating that the frontrunner for a long time had been African-American. He seemed like a viable candidate but then he turned out to have issues that sink many a politician a wandering eye. The remaining candidates dont seem to differ greatly on the big-picture issues but they attack each other viciously on topics that I guess they believe will energize some area of the Republican base taxes, reproductive rights. When I think back to the 2008 election it almost seems like an exercise in futility. Professional political scientists and reputation experts could not muster a cohesive and strong campaign against a tidal wave of people seeking change extreme change from George Bush. John McCain could have been that change, but I think Barack Obama appealed to peoples emotions, pockets and sense of hope. I think about that in terms of the rider and the elephant and I consider how people who had not voted democrat before were speaking at rallies for Obama which was the case at a rally I attended. The woman had been a lifelong republican and had refinanced her home right before the housing bust and

the factory where she worked shuttered. She said shed have to work for the rest of her life to pay off her debt. A change appealed to her emotional and planning side. The grassroots efforts Obamas campaign employed touched people like her and motivated them enough to vote and campaign as they never had. Thats powerful. -I can only describe the Republican primary as a roller coaster. Newt Gringrich is faltering, then hes flying. Then hes faltering again. In the meantime, Mitt Romney seems incapable of appealing to peoples emotions might have something to do with his robotic personality. His tendency to say something that can be perceived as elitist and arrogant doesnt help, either. I wonder how long it will take before the Republicans can find a candidate who has the personality, intellect and conservative credibility to woo all the right voters. The current crop seem lacking. Those not running Jeb Bush, Bobby Jindal and others seem to garner more buzz but wont enter the race. If I were a political advisor, I think Id plan a campaign based on Switch. Id look for a candidate who could appeal to peoples riders while motivating their elephants as well. Of course, I think the republicans would like that, too. -So, a couple of days ago, Im on Facebook and read a post from my 13-year-old cousin that says, Who the f-ck is Kony? After I digested the idea of my little cousin cursing, I, too, wondered who Kony was. It didnt take long to find out. I was tweeted a link to a video several times and information was posted on Facebook. To be honest, I viewed the video and found it brilliantly seductive. The innocent faces and youthful hopes of changing the world made me want to run back to Africa and do some more work to help the less fortunate. Considering the texts weve read, I note that the video appealed to emotions and made suggestions small and doable. Without benefit of much research, I was thoroughly impressed. I didnt donate to the cause, but that had more to do with my bank account than my desire to help. So, my last entry praised the makers of the Kony video and the social-media movement that it included. Well, fast forward almost a week and I get a tweet from the Better Business Bureau criticizing the organization that did it and questioning their accounting practices. Within a day the whole movement seemed to have turned from one generating action to criticism of the leader. It didnt help that he went crazy. I have to think back to my old Propaganda days and wonder where the original message would have fit. The emotional appeal and heartfelt sentiment seemed to be there. The groundswell certainly ensued. I only wish it had been legitimate enough to be sustainable. In the meantime, Im getting a lot of postings about a shooting that took place in Florida. A young boy wearing a hoodie was gunned down by a neighborhood watchman. Its largely come through my black friends n social media. I think this may be the next groundswell, but I dont have a lot of details. --

Jerry Reese very interesting fellow. He visited our Persuasion class and outlined a case for having a major-league ballpark in downtown Charlotte, as opposed to the minor-league effort currently being touted. He raised a lot of good points and won me over, but I can understand why he might not win over public support or Center-City partners. He comes across as really confident and makes a lot of salient points, but he is securely focused on stopping the Knights from coming to downtown Charlotte, not the long-term vision. Now, his goal is to have the major-league stadium sitting where a school for disabled children and other buildings currently sit. Pushing aside helpless kids isnt a good look and he makes no apologies as he glosses over it as part of his overall vision. He also doesnt give any specifics about how he would get a major-league team in Charlotte. The Knights, being here already, is the bird in the handle that people are looking at as they dismiss him. I do however, get his idea of concentrating on stopping the Knights stadium. Once its done, its done and he will lose the opportunity to have the major-league part where he wants it. But, he needs to expand his persuasive efforts beyond the immediate stop and begin a strong, focused effort on building support for a major-league stadium. He should get some of Charlottes biggest wallets to listen to him and he may find support there. Otherwise, I think hes fighting a futile battle. -The Trayvon Martin case where a 17-year-old was shot walking home by a neighborhood watch guy has exploded into the public consciousness. Its interesting that it seems to be along racial lines in a way that makes me uncomfortable. African-Americans, like myself, question why a young man was seemingly chased down and shot and no charges were filed. Many seem quick to back the overzealous and rogue neighborhood watch guy, George Zimmerman. I dont know what the outcome will be, but I find it interesting that the case was pretty much dead in the water until a groundswell of social media mostly among blacks led to news coverage and reopened a case the local law enforcement in the city where it occurred has considered dead. Social media can be a powerful tool and, with the right messaging and effort, it can change minds, actions and even laws. I guess newspapers used to be relevant like that, but anyone can be a journalist now. That reality is both encouraging in a case like Trayvon Martin and frightening in cases where people pass along lies as news and it goes viral. -If I had a few dollars to burn, Id buy a copy of Switch and send it to the salesperson I just reported to the Better Business Bureau. His brilliant technique to appeal to my rider and elephant was to yell at me. Now, he had some good points initially I own a timeshare that I dont get to use much and would love to see, but have not been able to thus far. I also pay a maintenance fee every year that goes toward next to nothing since I never get to travel the way I want. But he kept repeating these talking points as he was trying to get me to pay hundreds of dollars for his company to market my timeshare days for rent and property for sale. Here are a couple of the repeated points: If you give me one percent of your trust, Ill earn the other 99 percent. Dont keep making the timeshare company rich.

We have requests right now from people wanting to rent properties like yours. You have to move fast or they will go to someone else.

Now, having been duped by such tactics twice before, I quickly smelled the scam. I informed the man that I had done this very marketing buy before and never even rented a day, nor could I reach the man from another company offering a similar opportunity t free me of the burdens of my timeshare. At that point, this new salesman offers to recover some of the funds from previous marketing purchases, saying they have been successful at getting some refunds. It sounded good, but I was not about to part with more money to see the same results. I give him the information and, of course, he says he can help as long as I buy their marketing agreement. Well, I said, if I got some of the money from the previous one, I could put it toward buying their agreement. Didnt hear form him. Weeks later, this guy calls me again to try and get one final sale, I guess. When I am resistant to all his tactics, he begins to yell at me and talk over me. I hung up. Is yelling supposed to be an effective tactic? Really? I cant think of a long-term motivation or large investment -- that would be accomplished by yelling at someone. So, I still have my money and I guess hes still trying to make his quota.

You might also like