Was what you "said" the same thing your audience "heard"?
Making the statement that "having meaningful dialog on social media challenging in 2020" is akin to saying that "pandemics sure are complicated!" It's tough to imagine a time when more variables have come together regarding exchanging information. Ironically, the pipeline is no longer the problem; from social media to texting and e-mail (and even...gasp....phone calls and in-person meetings), we've never had more ways to potentially connect...the real challenges are context and filter.
Peter Drucker famously warned business professionals that communication takes place via the eyes, ears, and mind of the receiver, not the sender. In other words, what you say, type, or record might just be meaningless if the target of your communications isn't receptive (or even speaking the same language).
Context, in this sense, is the channel or medium we're using....and different means of transmission are appropriate to different people based on age, background, tech-savvy, and a whole host of other issues. We literally have five generations in the workplace at the same time right now, ranging from 18-85. How do you create a message that can the 18 year old Instagram fan with the senior who is still working because they lost their retirement in the crash of 2008? A first part of the the equation is, indeed, context..in this case, knowing which medium each demographic will find appropriate to their given scenario. For example, many GenXers love Facebook, but will prefer to use e-mail for work-related communications. Conversely, the Millennial manager might be more comfortable with standard text messaging or What's App for the same environment. The challenge lurking in the background here is also the tendency of people to post things on social media they would never say in person.
Filters are attached to all of our eyes, ears, and brains, whether we know it or not. Accept that all people (including YOU) see the world through your biases. In our increasingly polarized society, the actual words we use can shut down communications before we even get into a substantial conversation. Mentioning the actual name of a politician or social movement often eliminates the ability to talk about principles as people's "lenses" fog over when they are challenged from a particular viewpoint. This hyper-sensitivity isn't limited to a specific political party, religion, or worldview. In some ways, I think it comes from the hyper-saturation of information we are bombarded with on a daily basis, the loudest and angriest of which seems to come to the forefront.
What does this scenario mean for the individual seeking "real" and substantial interaction on social media? Flexibility and stealth are the keys to managing context and filter. Here's some strategies:
Be capable of multiple context languages. While Twitter might be a great place for a political debate, Instagram is a picture vacation, and if you're looking for truly civil debate about the intersection between business and politics, LinkedIn might be a better avenue. The platforms themselves set expectations of users.
Know when to say when. Whether it is someone trying to start a fight or simply a conversation that's gotten too time-consuming, there are instances when it's time to walk away. If you find yourself replying to social media posts with one sentence answers, which are repeatedly replied to by the same person, consider taking the conversation to an individual messenger chat. The interaction is likely to be more quick and maybe even more respectful.
Take on principles and not individuals. By the time you've mentioned a political candidate or social movement's name, many of the people you're communicating with have already made up their minds. Instead of talking about the republican or democratic approach to healthcare, for example, try exploring what is and isn't working in the U.S. hospital system. Using personal stories or anecdotes to build consensus is a far less dangerous path than applying the examples of our political leaders too.
When all else fails, remember that it's not a democracy. When people resort to unprovoked attacks, we have the tools to delete offensive material and even block individuals. If you're not seeking input or unwanted segue into political debate, let it be known that such lines of conversation will be deleted. I
So much of our meaning can get lost in the actual terminology we use, but there is hope! Remember how your math teacher used "word problems" to illustrate pragmatic application of quantitative theory in a non-intimidating way? We can do the same approach to apply principled communications while avoiding triggers.
Remember: It's not always what you SAY that matters; it's what THEY hear!
Comments
Post a Comment