Throughout our waking hours we are bombarded with the particular communication that our textbook defines as “communication as strategic control” What makes this communication style so effective is that the individuals who receive the message are left to twist and elaborate on the context as they see fit.
Exhibit A:
Political figures are a great example of those that utilize this communicative tool. Our president elect recently conveyed a simple, yet ambiguous message that played wonderfully into the hearts and minds of the majority. Moreover, we heard tear-jerking stories of people who were suffering physically, emotionally and spiritually and yet, his profound words led us to believe that if we merely checked a box next to his name, then peace and tranquility would ensue. Sure, he wasn’t the first person to stand in front of the discontented and parlay his good willed intentions. For as long as I can remember, every politician endears himself to the masses by promising the galaxy, yet when a mere ray of sunshine would suffice, they rarely come through with a speck of dirt. Healthcare for all? Consider it done. No child left behind? Certainly not! Raising Taxes? Not under this regime. Expanding the role of the United States within the global economy? You get the idea. Their message is vague, contrived and artificially encompassing; however, they become elected on the ability to convey the contrary.
Don’t get me wrong, I like Barack Obama; at least I like him more than the other candidates. However, isn’t earning our endearment not the sole intended purpose of a politician? They simply say bits and pieces of what we want to hear and let us convolute the words, on our own accord nonetheless, into something more grandiose.
Frankly, I hope for the best, but my prediction is the giddiness and hype that perpetuated the rise of this great presidential, “savior of mankind”, will no doubt feature the pseudo effort and lackluster results of his predecessors. All of the grand plans, schemes and dreams will alas, be forgotten. After all, during every presidential election, I’m taken back to the 6th grade when the student body president was elected by extending the promise of having “ better food at school”
Obama’s message to the masses: hope and change.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Strategic ambiguity provides a way to bring people together and avoids the problems associated with hashing out highly concrete language on which no one can agree. Strategic ambiguity is essential for something like an organization's mission statement because it allows a disparate group of people to work together with some sense of shared purpose. Too much ambiguity can be harmful, however. Consider the fuzziness surrounding the bailout of the U.S. financial industry. With no strings attached to the first $350 billion, no one seems to know how the money was spent or even if the bailout worked. Using ambiguous language gave the administration total control over disbursing the funds. Congress is working to change that for the next round, but I suspect there still will be plenty of ambiguous wording to give the Treasury Department lots of wiggle room.
ReplyDeleteOh don't get me started on the very loose strings associated with the $350 billion bailout. That one in particular makes my blood boil. Chapter 2 does an excellent job of connecting the dots in terms of the amiguity. As people become more informed of these types of egregious violations that have and will continue to take place in the government and corporate arenas, will the communication styles become more transparent? Thank you for bringing up the bailout, as this is an even better exaample to support strategic control communication.
ReplyDelete-Squid
I found your blog really insightful. I am one to get caught up in the ambiguity of messages and fall for a fairy tale ending. However, I do see that the ideas that make us feel good are not the most realistic. It would be nice to think Obama could make the world a better place and he indeed has brought hope and undoubtedly will bring change. I can only hope that he brings change that helps our country.
ReplyDeleteOn the contrary, as you say in your heading, cult leaders and Presidents use the same strategies, and all I can think is that this is the method the most influential people use. While it seems it is not the most ethical, it is definitely the most powerful. After all most Americans do not know anything about politics, but everybody wants hope for a better future and that is what everyone of these leaders have done. It seems that strategic control is a very influential style of leadership.