Misunderstandings Happen

I have recently been conducting research on nonverbal messages that occur during an interview interaction between the interviewer(s) and the interviewee. A statistic that I have repeatedly read (yet haven’t any definitive source to cite) is that only a small percentage of communication involves actual words, only 7% of communication involves words to be exact (at least from the statistics that I read). In fact 55% of communication is visual (body language, eye contact) and 38% is vocal (pitch, speed, volume, tone of voice). The most common body language attributes, mentioned in the research I found, that sway a person’s opinion of another are: eye contact, posture and hand gestures. Then there were several additional attributes mentioned at random. Some of these are more obscure, but a few I was surprised to find not mentioned with more regularity. They consist of: choice of positionality, smiling, fiddiling with props, bobbing your head, rocking or fidgeting, and mirroring your body language to match that of the interviwer’s. Alas, all communication, and that includes body language and other types of nonverbal messages, is ultimately left up to the perception or interpretation of its receiver. This is the epitome of how misunderstandings happen. The Fur-Kid

Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus

Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus There was a popular self-help book in the 1990’s written by American author, and relationship counselor, John Gray. Gray suggested that the most common relationship problems between men and women are a result of fundamental differences between the genders, that men and women are from, relatively speaking, distinctly different planets, – men from Mars and women from Venus– and that each gender is acclimated to its own planet's society, customs, and LANGUAGE. Women are the “gatherers” who are drawn to working in groups and continually discussing the happenings in their lives. Men on the other hand are hunters who are created to work independently and since they have no one to converse with have acquired the distinct characteristic of keeping their life’s developments to themselves. These differences in language use become quite prominent when one is looking at it in the terms of interpersonal relationships. It almost becomes like a clash of the titans or like trying to fit a square peg in a round hole. Can these language differences be overcome? Well that, in my opinion is up to the individuals. I don’t think there is one cure-all remedy to each gender being from its own planet, with its own society, customs, and LANGUAGE. The Fur-Kid

Involuntary attention

Involuntary attention…  I was on a plane the other day.   Have been on hundreds of plane trips and the initial flight information given on emergency procedures has become so hum-drum that I barely listen.  In fact most of the time it sounds like the teacher from Charlie Brown, “Wahn,wahn, wahn, wahn, wahn.”  And this was like all others, Wahn,wahn, wahn, wahn, wahn.”  That is until we were about ready to take off, we were building speed, I was doing homework and all of a sudden WHAM, the brakes went on and I was jolted into reality.  My attention then became voluntary as I wanted to know if we were ok and what the heck just happened.  Attention takes place in short increments.  So many times, especially if it is something we have heard before or it is something we are not interested in, we listen but not really, perhaps we “go to Jamaica” for a visit.  So how do we listen?  We make a conscious decision to pay attention.

The Fur-Kid 

To Judge or Not to Judge?

Is it possible to perceive others without somewhat judging or categorizing them?  I don’t think so.  As humans we categorize and/or judge in order to process or understand another.  We frequently use the schemata of Person Prototypes to form impressions and to understand or interpret messages of others.   Person Prototypes are the idealized representations of a certain kind of person.  W, as humans draw these assumptions based on past experience and transference of others real or made up (as in fibs and television or movies) understanding of a certain type of person.  Even though this may help us to identify people this way but it may also lead to stereotyping; which can be unfair in judgment and causing discrimination.  So if this is a natural human instinct in order to attempt to comprehend and understand others and it can lead to the negative outcome of discrimination, how do we make these judgments fairer?  Well there is a process that can help but it takes a conscious effort.  This process is known as mindful processing.  Mindful processing requires a person to be in a place where they are in a hyper-vigilant state of awareness.  They are constantly aware of both the past and the present and are able to separate experiences and perceptions, taking each person and situation on as unique so that they do not automatically process on formation without thinking it to through and separating it. Personally this does not sound completely realistic.  I believe human behavior is mostly intuitive and many times they/we don’t even realize what we are doing or not doing.  If we were to implement mindful processing, it would be just that, a process, and a slow one. So, should we judge/categorize others?  No, but do we and will we?  Yes and it will always come with both positives and negatives.


The Fur-Kid

Empty words?

I love rhetoric, and I love studying it.  Right now I am in a critical rhetoric research methods class and in combination with 105P I am beginning to truly understand the many layers and depth of rhetoric.  As a person in our society you here over and over again, “Oh that is just rhetoric.”  Meaning, “Oh those are just words,” or worse yet, “those are just empty words.”  Words are never empty.  Each word holds an insurmountable amount of meaning.  First I want to clarify the meaning of rhetoric as it is not “just words.”  Rhetoric, as described on p. 235 in Thinking through Communication (Trenholm, 2011), is “the art of designing public messages that can change the way in which audiences think and feel about public issues.”  As you can see there is no way that rhetoric could be “just empty words.” Trenholm goes on to explain some of the social functions of rhetoric such as 1) Discovering facts, 2) Testing ideas, 3) Persuading others, 4) Shaping knowledge, 5) Building community, and 6) Distributing power.  As a critical rhetorician it is my, our, job to research the information and or artifacts for our audience make an educated decision and then impart that information to our audience by means of persuasion.  It is not the outcome that is as important to a critical rhetorician but the process and the instigation of an audience to come to their own decision even if it is not the same as ours. Oh no, rhetoric is so not “just empty words.”

The Fur-Kid

Have a good day!

One of the best speakers of all-time, in my opinion, is our current president of the United States, Barack Obama.  What I like most about Obama’s speaking qualities is his ability to make you, as an individual, feel that he is speaking directly to you.  This reminds me of when Obama and Clinton were running for the Democratic representative for Presidential election, 2008.  Both said, in my opinion, really good things, but when it came down to deciding who to elect as my party’s representative my selection process became very simple.  I imagined the both sitting at my kitchen table and them both telling me to have a good day. Then all I needed to decide was who I truly believed really meant it.  A lot of background research went into my final decision, but this is what it was simplified to in the end.  In the end it was Obama that I could visualize saying “have a good day,” handing me my lunch bag and I could feel him really meaning it.  Some of his speaking characteristics are first and foremost his charisma.  Charisma as defined by Dictionary.com is: “a spiritual power or personal quality that gives an individual influence or authority over large numbers of people.”  His charismatic abilities give him power.  He did not have presidential power when he first began to run for president in 2007, but he did have charisma which has proven to be much more powerful and gave him a certain type of credibility.  He also had well deserved credibility due to his track record while being elected to the United States Senate in Illinois, 2004.  All of this said there is another characteristic that makes Barack Obama an outstanding speaker, his attractiveness.  Obama has a creamy complexion, he is tall and slender, he has a strong, clear, yet caring voice, and a relationship that appears to be wonderful with his beautiful wife and their two lovely children.  All of these equate to attractiveness.  Have a good day Barack, and I mean it!   J


The Fur-Kid

Words are not all that matter...

I think we are influenced by a large array of speakers everyday.  Unfortunately I can’t recall the name of the speaker who had  a significant impact on my life.  I’m sure with a bit of detective work I could find it though.  What  do remember is how mesmerized I was by her and her words.  First of all she was attractive and had a pleasant speaking voice.  She also had a way of speaking that, at least for me, felt like she was speaking directly to each person as an individual.  She had a sense of authority in her speaking, yet it still came across with a casual tonality to it.  Overall it was as much about how she presented herself as it was about what she was saying.  This reminds me of when Obama and Clinton were running for the Democratic representative for Presidential election, 2008.  Both said, in my opinion, really good things, but when it came down to deciding who to elect as my party’s representative my selection process became very simple.  I imagined the both sitting at my kitchen table, and them both telling me to have a good day. Then all I needed to decide was who I truly believed really meant it.  A lot of background research went into my final decision, but this is what it was simplified to in the end.

As for the worst speaker I have ever heard, well I honestly can’t say I “heard” him at all.  There once was a speaker who, from what I understand, had a good message to share.  Unfortunately I never heard the message due to the inappropriately graphic t-shirt he was wearing.  The t-shirt was so appalling and distracting that I, and others in my near vicinity, could not internalize what the speaker was saying.

As I mentioned previously, it is as much in how a speaker presents themselves as it is what they say, but you can’t have one without the other.


The Fur-Kid

What is Communication? A Never Ending Story.

Just like the cliché about opinions the same can be said for definitions of communication; everyone has one and every one is slightly different.  Here are four fairly different, yet fairly similar definitions of communication as described in Sarah Trenholm’s textbook, Thinking Through Communication: An Introduction to the Study of Human Communication (2011):

1.       Communication is a process of acting on information.

2.       Communication is the discriminatory response of an organism to stimulus.

3.       Communication is a process whereby people assign meanings to stimuli in order to make sense of the world.

4.       Communication is the transmission of information, ideas, emotions, skills, etc., by the use of symbols – words, pictures, figures, graphs, etc.

In 2008 and entered my junior year as a Communication Studies journey and began with taking a Communication Studies 101 class.  It was in this class that I remember hearing the first definition of communication that really resonated with me, “Communication is a systemic process in which individuals interact with and through symbols to create and interpret meanings.” (Wood, 2004)  From this definition grew my own personal definition of communication, “Communication is an ongoing process of interrelated parts that affect one another, and where individuals interact by using representations to create significance.” (Pollino, 2008)  All of these definitions leave plenty of wiggle room for interpretation.  Why, because the possibilities within communication is never ending.

The Fur-Kid

A Pragmatic Communication Model: Game Over

What is a pragmatic communication model?  Well it is a view of communication that likens it to something as simple as a game of checkers.  It suggests that communication is nothing more than a bunch of sequential moves where each move relies on the one before it making the players in this game called Communication dependent on each other in order to make their next move or be able to communicate.  As you can probably decipher by my description of the pragmatic communication model, am not a fan.  It doesn’t make sense to me to assume that something as complex as communication can be viewed as a dependent and patterned interaction.  I can understand how similarities may be drawn between communication and games as both require partners, or more than one participant to embark. Of course, with the exceptions of solitaire and intrapersonal communication, still this continues the parallel that can be viewed between communication and a game. In games it is one players turn and then another and so on, most times this similarly transpires between participants in communication between participants.  How it differs is there is no room for randomness or interruption of this process with a game that would go against the rules of the game.  Communication transpires with the flexibility of if a new participant enters the communication process it is not “game over.”

The Fur-Kid

Animal Welfare Culture: A Social Constructionist Perspective

Just recently I have embarked down a new path in my journey called life.  I have fully immersed myself into a new culture, the Animal Welfare Culture.  Even though I have been involved with animal care for the past seven years it was not until a few months ago that this involvement became a way of life for me.  I have had some face to face interactions but the majority of my communications within this culture have been via the internet.  Being a very visual learner, communicating and learning the culture through pictures and written correspondence has been quite powerful. This hasn’t been a complete paradigm shift as it builds on parts from my existing culture.  That said it is interesting that when you say the word culture people automatically think of nationality type cultures.  But entering the Animal Welfare culture is just like entering any nationality based new culture, with a few exceptions.  There have been new values, beliefs and attitudes to embrace, new ways of viewing behavior both within the culture and outside of it, and a new language to learn.  One of the exceptions is in language, particularly concerning accent.  There is a new language but it does not require the knowledge of inflection and specialty pronunciations.  For example the other day I sent an email to someone not part of the Animal Welfare Culture, in the email I referred to a dog that had crossed as a “furkid.”  The response that I received was, “it took me a moment to realize that when you wrote “furkid” you were referring to a pet.  The word “pet” is politically incorrect in my new culture, the politically correct term would be, “companion animal.”  The word “furkid” is a slang form of the term “Companion animal.”  Another word frequently used in the Animal Welfare Culture, which I used a few sentences previous, is that of “crossed” when referring to an animal that has died.  That relates to the belief that when an animal dies its spirit goes to a place called Rainbow Bridge, hence the word “crossed” as in crossed the bridge.  Personally these concepts of Social Constructionism contribute to my personal happiness as they fall in alignment with my personal values.  Selecting to follow my career path into the Animal Welfare Culture will bring me great success, whatever that may look like.

The Fur-Kid

Not One, But All FIVE

I would like to discuss The Five Cannons of Rhetoric.  Whenever you prepare a speech you usually prepare an outline, what I refer to as the “I” form, which includes an introduction, body, and conclusion.  Well this may seem like the only consideration an individual has in preparing their speech, but that couldn’t be farther from the truth.  It is actually third on the orderly list of speech or communication.  First there is invention.  This is where a speaker needs to decide a topic, what can be said about this topic and how does the speaker want to approach persuading or informing their audience on this topic.  It is in the area of invention that ethos, pathos and logos first come into play.  Second of the cannons is style, what tone the speaker wants to set for his/her speech.  Considerations may be: conversational, philosophical yet not quite formal, or formal and very ornate.  Now then we arrive at the actual writing or arrangement of the speech.  This is the point where a speaker prepares the basic organization of the speech.  Now then a speaker may do all this pre-work and forget a very important aspect of speech giving, especially if one has chosen their style to be of a casual tone, memorization.  This does not necessarily mean to memorize the speech word for word, as a speech may then come out robotic, stiff and well sounding memorized and not real. Just memorize the main points, keywords and phrases in the order the speech was arranged.  This will allow the speech to flow easily for both the speaker and the audience.  Last, but oh so far from least is the delivery.  This is the coordination of both non-verbal skills and verbal presentation.  The delivery can make or break a speech.

The Fur-Kid

"SHOULD"

“The Greeks believed that to be an orator, an individual had to be morally good.”    Well if I agree or disagree depends on the type of oration.  If we are speaking of dialectics, dialogue or conversation, then yes I believe the orators should be morally good since dialectics is the art of coming to the truth through conversation.  The keyword here is should, but in reality this is not always the case.  The same goes for rhetoric, the art of using language to persuade, influence or change.  An orator should be morally good, but this is not always the case.  What comes to mind here is a salesman; it would be wonderful to know that what they are telling you about the product they are trying to influence you to buy is the truth, but can you really trust them, are they being morally good.  Unfortunately this is pretty doubtful.  Lastly is sophistry.  Sophistry is all about “trickery” and the use of misleading and deceptive reasoning.  So all in all there should be a connection between goodness, truth, and public communication, but unfortunately should doesn’t mean is.  Yes, an individual may be a good orator, but not necessarily morally good. 

The Fur-Kid

The Food Revolution

One of the many orators I admire is John Robbins, author of such books as: Diet for a New America and The Food Revolution.  I was privileged to see John Robbins speak in a semi-private arena at the Santa Clara Convention Center around 2001.  John Robbins is the director for many nonprofit organizations concerned with the environment, health, world hunger, genetic engineering, and the welfare of all species.  As you can tell by the titles of both books mentioned, a central concern of his is with food and the world’s, in particular the United State’s, diet.  In 2001 I had just recently watched the Diet for a New America movie and was interested in hearing John Robbins speak on the issues addressed in the movie.  I remember how impressed I was with his public speaking abilities.  He was so relaxed and easy going, yet so enthusiastic and persuasive with his message.  I truly believe that John Robbins’ power to persuade does not stem from only one area, ethos, pathos, or logos, but from all three.  His credibility was previously established with the writing of his two books, one book being made into a movie, this is ethos.  As far as ethos he had a firm grip on both his emotions and was able to rein in control of his audiences emotions at appropriate times.  An especially touching narrative that he shared was about his childhood as the only son of the ice cream mogul that owned yes, Bascom & Robbins and how he left home to find a healthier, more humane living style.  As John Robbins spoke the logic, and logos, behind the suggestions he was making undeniable.  Almost every argument he presented was supported by at least two facts. 

As for me and my persuasive skills, well I would have to say it depends on the subject that I am speaking on and whom I’m trying to persuade, my audience.  In general my honesty and positive intentions toward people, and my critical thinking ability is one of my strong points, ethos.  That said, I do know how to work an audience with emotional appeal for sure, pathos.  Even though I have excellent critical thinking skills, logos may be my weak link.  Unless it’s a subject that I am well versed on or have explicit notes on, my weakest area would be logos.  It is sometimes difficult for me to back up my arguments with strong premises.

"Smiles, smiles everyone!"

Hello fellow classmates of Communication Self and Society!

I am looking forward to a fabulous semester of understanding my personal communication role and our collective communication roles in this diverse society.

I am not quite sure how this particular online class works yet, so please bare with me.  For now you can call me, “Fur-Kid.”   I selected this blogging alias because of my passion and devotion to animal rescue and advocacy.  I would have to add that this alias also spawns from the fact that I own a small pet sitting business.  My little business not only supports my life need (food, rent, gas), but also supports my educational habit.  I say this because I returned to school, after many years off, and graduated from SJSU with my B.A. in Communication Studies in 2010.  I am presently finishing up my Masters at San Jose State in Communications and was recently accepted into another graduate program in Washington D.C.  I began online classes with HSU (Humane Society University) just 2 short weeks ago.

In 105P I am interested in exploring the role that different types of communication plays in the formation of biases and inequalities, and specifically apply this to so called “bully breeds” in the canine world. 

Again, I’m looking forward to a fantastic and knowledge expanding semester with all of you!!  J

~ The Fur-Kid