Euphemisms

One of the things I enjoyed most about Chapter 4 in our textbook was the use of euphemisms.  The examples in the book that defense strategists used were mind boggling to me.  I had heard the terms “collateral damage” and “friendly casualties” before, but never really put thought into the meaning behind them and how they were mean to downplay the fact that American troops were being killed in war by American bombs and in turn made it easier for Americans to dismiss.  Well apparently it worked because these euphemisms were unnoticed by me.  I think as parents we use euphemisms with our children to protect them from the reality of the dangers in the world or saving themselves from embarrassment or perhaps to ease their own comfort level.  For example, many parents teach their children nicknames or euphemisms for their private parts to avoid embarrassing situations if the child blurts out the real word in public which could be socially awkward.

Language: Men Vs. Women

I definitely feel that men and women use language differently.  I would agree with the textbook that women generally communicate about feelings and seek a connection and intimacy whereas men seek to communicate about common interests and achievements.  This is not to say that this stereotype fits everyone.  In most of my relationships, I have ended up dating men who take more of the traditional woman role and want to talk about the relationship and their feelings whereas I do not.  Also in Table 4.5 in the textbook “Conclusions Drawn from Research on Gender Differences in Communication”, I definitely use stronger expletives than most men I know. J  But for the most part, if you walk around your office or sit at your child’s soccer game and listen to other conversations, you will hear the women gossiping about other moms, or talking about a great purse they bought, or a funny thing their child did that day.  You will most often hear the men talk about the game on TV last night, or how they grill their steak on the BBQ or what kind of car they drive.  I think that communication between men often is superficial and surface level, whereas women are looking for that immediate connection and someone that will become a part of their lives.

Perceiving Others

I think it is nearly impossible to not perceive or judge another person who is communicating to us in one way or another.  I will be the first to admit that I am guilty of this and I am sure most can agree.  We judge on how the person looks, how they talk, how they express themselves, what we know about them, their history, what we have heard about them, what we assume they are like, what their ethnic background is and stereotypes that are associated with that, their religious or political affiliations or their economic status.  The list goes on.  I think as receivers we take the message that is sent to us, and see if we can apply it to our own lives, morals and values.  If they don’t align, that is where the judgment is formed.  I think the best way to overcome this is to try and keep an open mind.  You won’t always agree with what someone has to say, but you can keep an open mind to the possibility that that is their truth and appreciate your differences.  I think in any situation, we can always take away some sort of lesson and apply it in our daily lives.

Rokeach's Terminal Values

One of my favorite parts of Chapter 9 was reading about Rokeach’s Terminal Values.  I would definitely agree that values are the strongest and most personal of the three cognitive structures:  beliefs, attitudes and values.  I could identify with nearly every value listed on the Terminal Values which is why it can be such a successful approach when making a speech.  Values are something that speakers can have in common with most everyone, and once you touch on values that are personal to the audience, I feel you have their undivided attention and they will better remember your speech long afterwards.  Rokeach’s Terminal Values are values that most all of us strive towards in life and aspire to.  Some values we are still fighting for in our nation such as equality and a world at peace.  It was interesting that they mentioned the catchphrase “family values” in the textbook as being popular in politics and that it dated back to 1992.  I wonder if “core beliefs” will ever be a popular catchphrase to win a presidential election?

Rudy Giuliani

Since I am not really into politics, I chose Rudy Giuliani as a well known speaker that I have had the pleasure of seeing live.  I first recall being moved by one of Rudy’s speeches after 9/11 and there was a special on HBO that was told from his point of view, as the Mayor of New York City.  I also saw him at a seminar called “Get Motivated!”.  I think Rudy’s strongest characteristic as a speaker was attractiveness.  Rudy Giuliani provided strength and leadership not only to the citizens of New York as the events of September 11^th unfolded, but to the entire nation.  He was not only leading the city of New York during that tragic day, but he was experiencing it right along with everyone else at the same time.  I feel that Rudy could have built his ethos with the audience in credibility because the motivational seminar turned out to be a sales pitch for expensive sales training and motivational programs.  I wish I had been able to go to the seminar and just enjoy the speech and take away some key points and instead I left feeling a bit duped.  In that same aspect, he probably could have improved his power because he didn’t sell me on having something that I wanted.  I left the seminar without purchasing a thing.

My Most Memorable Speaker

I posted about this speaker in a previous blog, but the speaker I recall being most affected by was Keith Obermann.  It was actually a video I had to watch for my Human Sexuality class and was a clip from his TV show regarding Proposition 8, which sought to eliminate the right for same sex couples to marry.  I think what made his speech most memorable is that he took a subject that I was indifferent on and made it personal for me.  He reached out to the audience and not matter what side of the fence you were on, he drew emotions from the audience that we could all relate to.  It became less about whether or not same sex couples should be allowed to marry and more about everyone having an equal chance at happiness.  What I remember most about his speech was that I felt the emotion in his speech.  At times I felt his frustration or anger and at other points I felt compassion and sadness.  He touched on core values that everyone could relate to such as marriage, happiness and stability.

Contexts For Observing Communication

What I found most interesting in the text were the Contexts for Observing Communication.  I was struggling to find a speech to critique for our upcoming assignment as I spend the majority of my time at work, school or soccer practice with my kids.  After emailing Professor Perez and then reading the model, it became much clearer to me how to first identify a public speech to observe and most importantly how to absorb the communication that is being delivered.  By looking for a community where people share a common interest and that calls for a speech (such as politics or religion), an occasion that calls for the speech (Presidential election, Sunday church service), the sequence of the speech activity (sermon, church retreats, political debates) and the purpose served by the speech (faith – religious and political).  These contexts were most effective in persuasive speeches, whether the deliverer is trying to gain your political vote or recruit you as a member of the church.

The Pragmatic Perspective

I feel that it definitely makes sense to think of communication as patterned interaction.  For instance, I feel that certain relationships I have bring out different sides of my personality and consist of different and unique banter.  With one person I may be sarcastic and witty, whereas another person I may be serious and compassionate.  I think communication is very much like a game because as in a game where you are contemplating your next move, as we listen to others communicating with us we are contemplating what we will say next.  It takes equal shares of listening, talking and respect in order to engage in successful dialogue.  The difference between patterned interaction and a game is that there does not need to be a “winner” in order for the interaction to be successful.  For example, you can go to a church service on Sunday and listen to your minister deliver his sermon.  Although you are only hearing or receiving the information being delivered and not engaging in dialogue, it can still be effective communication if you take away certain ideas or messages delivered in the sermon and apply them to your daily life.

Social Constructionist Perspective

We “build worlds” through communication by interpreting what we see and hear and identifying what is culturally significant to us.  Our perception of the world comes more from what is communicated to us versus what we actually experience.  For example, many people could perceive the world as violent based on what they see on the evening news.  Even though what they see is not their individual experience, they take it as accurate information to base their opinion on based on the fact that most everyone is viewing the same news stories in one fashion or another.  One form of communication that is popular in our culture today is texting.  Face to face or phone conversations are becoming a thing of the past and more and more people rely on texting to communicate with their spouse, children, friends or loved ones.  This is a new concept to our elders such as our grandparents and for some of us even our parents as texting was not around approximately 15 plus years ago.  I think texting takes away from our success as a society for several reasons.  I believe that it takes away personal face to face conversation as well as a simple text message can be interpreted different ways.  I believe texting has made us an impersonal society where we lack the interaction we once had.