Thursday, January 11, 2007

Nuance and understanding are dead in our quick-to-criticize web world

Modern media has crushed most people's ability to understand nuance -- to comprehend a subtle point being made or the message or meaning behind someone's words.

Far too often, we focus on a choice phrase -- often taking it out of context -- and blow up without really ever stopping to think what the point was.

We are "word police," always on the lookout for something that we don't like, something we can criticize.

That type of attitude is a major detriment to true communication, and a real reason why so many companies/organizations/people are afraid to truly dialog with others.

Most importantly, it takes a medium that has great potential to increase understanding and help people find common ground -- the internet -- and turns it into one big shouting match, with no one really learning anything other than how to pick apart another's point of view.

Example: Oprah and her comment about materialism.

Oprah Winfrey builds a school in South Africa for girls. And the media asks her why there and not the United States. Oprah -- who gives generously to domestic educational initiatives -- says the following:

“I became so frustrated with visiting inner-city schools that I just stopped going. The sense that you need to learn just isn’t there. If you ask the kids what they want or need, they will say an iPod or some sneakers. In South Africa, they don’t ask for money or toys. They ask for uniforms so they can go to school.”

Did Oprah say all inner-city kids? Did she mention any particular race or culture? Did she say kids in the suburbs don't want iPods?

She said none of those things. But it didn't stop people from picking out the "iPod and sneakers" line and using that to batter her for a wide range of ills, from racism to her own show's materialistic bent.

So what did Oprah say that is important? To me, the critical part of her comment was the first line -- that she is frustrated with inner-city schools and the progress they are making in building a culture that values education.

But few people really captured Oprah's meaning and intent. They saw an opportunity to use her words against her, and they jumped. Her message was lost in a hailstorm of criticism from bloggers and pundits, all convinced that Oprah had gone out of her way to harm black students in America.

Next example, via Jeff Jarvis and BuzzMachine: The Guardian newspaper's music critic, Dorian Lynskey, writes a column about what it's like to have people comment on articles. Lynskey says:

The most belligerent voices on the blogs speak with either a weary, condescending sneer or a florid pomposity redolent of Ignatius J Reilly in A Confederacy of Dunces. If, as they imply, their taste is flawless and their intellect mighty, then perhaps they could find a better use for these prodigious gifts than taking potshots on websites.

Lynskey dared to criticize Bruce Springsteen, and was called a "knobhead" and probably far worse. But if you don't like Springsteen, you don't like him. There's no right or wrong there ... right?

And look what happened to Washington Post education writer Jay Mathews when he jokingly suggested in a column that there were no good middle schools.

Is it any wonder that Joel Stein doesn't want feedback on his columns?

If you've ever posted a comment on a site that deals with controversial issues, you know the drill. As soon as you press "submit," somebody is busy parsing your words, accusing you of being an idiot or hateful or out of touch , and knocking you over the head with strawmen.

Of course, this is all about the speed and ease with which we can "talk back" today. Surely it's a good thing, but sometimes you just have to wonder.

We all need to do a better job of understanding nuance and seeing the bigger picture. What is the real message being communicated? What am I seeing as an absolute that the writer or speaker intended as an example? And what can I learn from a different point of view?

I hope you agree with me. If you don't, leave a comment here ... but don't call me a "knobhead."

Labels: , , ,