Virtual Disaster:

An Investigation Into Common Errors.

In this section only, assume that any claim printed in Purple is true as stated. In other words, if I write: The Eiffel Tower is in South Dakota. Pack your bags and head for sunny Pierre.

Errors of Logic.

ALL DOGS DRIVE VOLVOS.
FRANK IS A DOG.
FRANK DRIVES A VOLVO.

Given the existence of our special condition about the truth of claims printed in red (see annoying blinking text above), one not only can conclude with confidence that Frank the Dog drives a Volvo, one's capacity to operate heavy machinery would be cast into doubt if one did not so conclude. That is because the statements provided are organized into what we can call a valid analytical form--in this case an "If-Then" statement wherein the first statement All dogs drive Volvos.--called the major premise--is provided as a broad immutable description of a population (in this case All Dogs). The second statement--the minor premise--describes a specific case within the influence of that general rule--Frank is a dog. The conclusion--Frank drives a Volvo.--is derived from the application of the major premise to the minor.

The problem that arises when we draw conclusions that we believe are warranted by logical form when in fact they are not is called a Logical Fallacy. For instance:
ALL DOGS DRIVE VOLVOS.
FRANK DRIVES A VOLVO.
FRANK IS A DOG.

Obviously, this conclusion does not follow from the the major and minor premises that precede it. If the major premise said ONLY DOGS DRIVE VOLVOS, then you would be secure in concluding that Frank is a dog.

Confused yet? Good. You have to develop an ear for these things in order to guard against them. Always be careful to say exactly what you mean, then be aware of the implications of what you say.
How about a Test?
ONLY DOGS DRIVE VOLVOS.
FRANK IS A DOG.
Does Frank drive a Volvo? The correct answer is . . . Maybe. There is insufficient information in the message to be sure. The major premise says only dogs drive Volvos, but not that each dog necessarily does.
The world of communication is repleat with logical fallacies, and they have been well-documented. Go to one or more of the following links to learn about the specific types:

Logical Fallacies.

Inferential Errors.

Remember that blinking thing at the top of this section? Web publishers hate those. Some browsers don't even look at them. Just in case you don't remember it or were insufficiently annoyed, allow me to do another, equally annoying one:

If you'd like to make this eyesore go away, click on the icon below.

How is that? Better?
That was a fairly simple, and one would have to say, effective message. You did what you were told, and you got what you wanted.

OR DID YOU?

Did it, in fact, go away?

Before you answer so positively, take a look at the URL of the page you are looking at now. Then hit the Icon below.

It's Back! Arrghh!!

Look at the URL again. See what I mean? It was never gone. YOU WERE GONE. The exploding Taunt was here all the time. You, on the other hand, were led down the information super highway to a rest stop outside Totowa and deposited in a place where everything was arranged to make you think you were satisfied.

In assuming that clicking the icon erased the exploding Taunt, you committed what is called an Inferential Error.
What? You say. You've done nothing wrong? You've been unfairly duped and lied to?
By whom? When?
Did I say clicking on the icon would in any way alter it?
No. Go look again. What I said was that if you want it to go away, click the icon. That is not the same.

Let's clarify our terminology.

I IMPLIED that clicking the icon would erase the exploding Taunt.
You INFERRED that I had stated that message directly. You, in fact, responded to what you thought I said, rather than what I said. That is an Inferential Error.

Let's Try Another One.

Have you ever heard of retread tires? They are tires on which the tread has worn down and a new one has been bonded in its place. They are significantly less expensive than new tires and--their advocates say--just as safe.

Are you convinced? If not consider the mythical Yellow Pages ad below (and remember, all claims made in purple can be considered true):

So, what do you think? Are there retreads in your future?

How are you responding to the content of the ad? Since you can accept as true for the sake of discussion the claim that 75% of all airlines in America use them, how have you factored that information into your reasoning process?
If you are like the vast majority of people with whom I have discussed this claim, your answer will sound like one of the following:

Who cares? Airplanes only use their tires to take off and land. How much wear do they get?

Or

That's convincing. Take-off and landing would be rough on tires, and airlines are among the most heavily regulated industries in the world. If they can use them on airplanes, they must be okay on cars.

Which sounds familiar to you?

Great, but let me ask you one more question . . .
Who said anything about airplanes? Lyle said "airlines."
They are probably used on baggage haulers and catering trucks, but you'd have to be a lunatic to put retreads on a jet airplane!

Only you know if you have fallen victim to yet another devious exercise in faulty inference. People, deliberately or not, make ambiguous statements, and we--trying to make sense of the communication event--add our own material in order to reduce the ambiguity. If you hear that a cereal is "part of a balanced breakfast" and assume that the cereal is good for you; if you hear that "The next five hundred callers will get a free T-Shirt" and assume that the first caller after them will not; if you hear that "Nothing works better than Brand Q." and assume that Brand Q is the best, recognize that no one has assaulted you with those claims. You have made them yourself. The aforementioned Logical Fallacy Sites speak to inferential error. Or, if you'd like, jump to the link below and try your hand at sorting out an inferential mess of a story:

Listening Problems.

I said . . . Listening problems! Sorry, I just wanted to make sure you were paying attention. While external noise, what we will call equipment errors and speaker-generated problems are all causes of listening problems, the main one is just the lack of willingness and/or ability to Pay Attention. Paying attention starts with the knowledge that Listening is the active acquisition of information, not its passive reception.

We do not "receive" messages; we hunt them down and eat them.

To the extent that you appreciate this you have the opportunity to become a good critical listener.

To Listen well to a speaker:

• Recognize that paying attention is a habit, not a desire. You can no more just decide to listen well than you can decide to run a marathon. Listening is a skill--a craft--it must be practiced and developed.
• Know what to listen for. Expectations are our best friends or our worst enemies depending on how accurate and immediate to the situation they are. But you are far more likely to have a meaningful encounter with a message if you generate some than if you don't. Here are some tips:
  • Define the context. While you want not to be closed-minded, it pays to ask yourself ahead of time what you expect to encounter and why you have those expectations.
  • In order to inform the previous suggestion, separate your facts from your presumptions. What do you know, and what do you only think you know. You can know someone is a conservative Republican. That does not mean you know what her position on the death penalty is. You cannot avoid having presumptions, but if you are aware that they are in fact only presumptions, you will use the message to test them instead of merely using it to reinforce them.
  • Use all of the information gleaned above to create an agenda. In other words, have something to listen for. Be an active seeker after information. Have a goal in your interaction with the speech.

    EXAMPLE: Let's say you have heard a particular politician is "slick." Your goal might be to listen for how concretely he defines his positions and how much evidence he uses to support them. Does he take positions that define him, or does he just come out in favor of vague abstractions? Having something specific to listen for helps you hear everything better.

  • Cooperate with the speaker. At least early in the address, give the speaker the opportunity to define the moment. Give the speaker the benefit of the doubt with regard to having a defined purpose and with regard to having your interests at heart. You will know soon enough if you are wrong.

To listen well as a speaker:

• Realize that you need to. Sure, you're doing all of the talking, but you still have to listen.

  All communication is conversation.

  Even if that is not literally true--I think it is--it is a good strategic way to define the event in your mind. This concept arose when we discussed audience analysis. But for now just recognize that the audience is talking to you while you speak. You need to be open to those signals, attend to them, and respond to them by altering your content and delivery accordingly.

• Be conscious of external sources of noise and the audience's responses to them. Is the air conditioner too loud or, worse yet, not on at all? Recognize the problems verbally (so that the audience will know you know) and take whatever steps you can to counteract them. Do not, however, whine about the conditions! If you portray the situation as hopeless, the audience members will succumb to your assessment and surrender to it. Treat it as just another challenge that your vast experience and your passion for the subject will permit you to overcome.
• Be time conscious. This may not seem like a listening issue, but it is. To listen is not merely to hear; it is to be in tune with your surroundings. The passage of time is one of the most important dynamics of those surroundings. The audience has an expectation for the length of your address. Violate it at your peril.

Ethical Errors.

The error is not accidently being unethical. The error is thinking you can get away with it. In the short term you might, but inevitably the cost to your credibility--and for that matter to the whole vital structure of public dialogue--will far outweigh the immediate gain.

So Play Fair!

The "Skinny" on Ethics:

Let's not get all weepy here. We can keep it simple.

• Remember that Ethical Behavior, like listening, is a habit. People who tend to fudge anywhere, tend to fudge everywhere. So work hard at being an ethical person, and ethical communication will take care of itself.
• It never hurts to have a list of commandments. So here goes:
  1. Thou shalt honor the audience above all others.
  2. Thou shalt not lie.
  3. Thou shalt not lie by omission.
  4. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's argument.
  5. Thou shalt tell the audience what thou wantst (wantest?) to say, not what they want to hear.
  6. Thou shalt not manufacture evidence.
  7. Thou shalt check thy facts.
  8. Thou shalt not coerce the audience.
  9. Thou shalt rehearse.
  10. Thou shalt endeavor to care.

Delivery Problems.

The biggest source of delivery malfunction you will have results from what is commonly called "Stage Fright" or "Speech Anxiety." Jump to the following link to address that problem in detail.

The TORTIS WAY: Overcoming Communication Anxiety.

There are, however, other common delivery problems to address. Let's do so.

Some Tips About Delivery:

• Delivery is like regular talk, only a little more so. Don't orate--at least not at this juncture--and don't mimic orators. Talk like you talk; use the styles and orientations that have worked for you in your interpersonal interactions. Just remember that all of it needs to be a little "Bigger"--that is, more exaggerated. Talk a little louder, and a little more slowly. Use gestures a little more overtly. Pause a little longer. Those of you fortunate enough to be in a choir at some time in your lives have a slight edge here. It is like that. Basses, remember "The Little Drummer Boy?"

  "prum-puddledy-puddledy-prum..."

  You felt like an idiot, but from the audience, it all melded together and sounded a lot like music. The major difference between talking and talking to groups of people is one of distance. You have to push it a little harder--that's all. That takes practice, but it is not hard.

• Concentrate on Variation. No matter how you talk you have to change how you talk every once in a while. Alter your pitch, rate, etc. Monotony is "sameness" not just sameness of bland delivery. All variables get monotonous if they remain unaltered for too long.

• Put a little energy in reserve. Have more energy than you use, because at some point you are going to need it. You might see the audience starting to drift. You may be overcome with more emotion on a point than you had planned. An unaccounted for environmental interruption (the air conditioner comes on, somebody can't stop coughing) threatens to distract them. You have to ratchet up the energy level just a little, and you can't if you haven't put anything in reserve. Again, this is a capacity that can only be gained through experience, but getting that experience means concentrating on the intent before you are truly able to actualize it. Tell yourself to hold some back, and eventually you will be able to without thinking about it.

"Thanks for the Advice, but What if in Spite of it I Foul Up?"

Let me reassure you. You are not likely to do something in your speaking career to humiliate yourself monumentally .

You are CERTAIN to do something in your speaking career to humiliate yourself monumentally .

Comfort yourself with the following truths:

• It did not seem as bad to us as it did to you.
• We've seen it before.
• You were doing pretty well before it happened.

In the face of this category of disaster, you have three basic options:

1. Ignore it and go on. This is the best option for pronunciation errors, minor lapses of concentration (resulting in really brutal episodes of "dead air") or other distractions. It is not a good option if something occurs that is pronounced and obvious (You read the same note card twice. You begin to stammer uncontrollably. You feel feint.) In these cases, opt for one of the following.
2. Say "Excuse me, I need a moment to collect my thoughts." Then take a moment to collect your thoughts. But do so in full view of all of us. Don't turn around or leave. Let us know that you are still in the game. Look down at the podium, shuffle your cards, whatever. Just don't gravitate too far away from the moment.
3. Define your error for the audience, then backtrack enough correct it.

   "I'm sorry. I got a little nervous and misstated a statistic. Let me go back and correct it."

All of these measures are preferable to collapsing in a heap and sobbing uncontrollably. What you do not want to do is launch into a self-indulgent, pathos laden narrative on how bad your life has been lately.

"I'm sorry. I really wanted to do a good job on this . . . but my computer broke . . . and my dog ate my outline . . . and my girlfriend left me . . . and . . . can I just start over?"

I can virtually guarantee that this will inflame, not lessen the audience's disregard for you. The most important thing is to project to the audience the truth--that these things happen, and that what is really important is getting on with it.

In short, apologize for you error, not your speech and certainly not your life.

A Little Elaboration on Those Commandments.

1. Thou shalt honor the audience above all others. A small amount of talk can have a profound effect. When you ask the audience to DO, THINK or FEEL something, they may very well comply--and that compliance can literally alter the courses of their lives and the lives of everyone around them. Recognize the inherent power in information and persuasion and use it responsibly.
2. Thou shalt not lie. 'nough said!
3. Thou shalt not lie by omission. You are not responsible to tell the whole story. Nor are you responsible to include opposition arguments in your text. You are, however, responsible to represent what you choose to say accurately, and that means not leaving out damaging yet essential elements of a piece of support.
4. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's argument. Do not plagiarize. If you did not think it up, give credit to whomever did.
5. Thou shalt tell the audience what thou wantst (wantst?) to say, not what they want to hear.
6. Thou shalt not manufacture evidence.
7. Thou shalt check thy facts. In the context of the first commandment, laziness and reckless stupidity are unethical. You can accidently manufacture evidence if you do not carefully double check what you think you already know. It is part of preparation.
8. Thou shalt not coerce the audience. In the end, public speaking is about letting the audience decide--to make them want to be different. They should always have the right to disregard the message, and the speaker has the ethical responsibility to make sure they know they have that right.
9. Thou shalt rehearse. You might not consider this an ethical issue, but it is. You do not have the right to waste our time. If we are compelled to attend to you politely, you ought to have the decency to do your best. You cannot do that without taking the time to prepare adequately.
10. Thou shalt endeavor to care. You should muster the same passion and commitment to the subject that you wish to extract from us. Why should we care if you don't? Also, see number one.

This is the End of "Virtual Disaster."

[Go Back to Virtual Consensus.] | [ Go Back to the Table of Contents.]

And this is the end of

The Audience Will.