There are better ways and worse ways to communicate. Duh. We all know this, but we don’t all do this. It’s ironic because when you read the first sentence, you immediately relate but chances are, you were remembering a time where you were not understood. You may have remembered someone else being a jerk, rude, blunt, etc. But I doubt you remember being the rude jerk. Hey, I get it. We’re all the heroes of our own stories.
I recently had an exchange on FB with a person I had recently friended. We don’t know each other terribly well, only spoken once or twice, but he presents himself as an ambassador for a group of people and Jewish community I’d like to learn more about. He’s an emissary; at least that’s what he says he is. This part is important.
After following his posts for a few weeks, most of which were light-hearted and benign, he posted something regarding a shortage of kosher chicken in some communities. I responded with a comment about considering it a sign that people may want to avoid eating meat. Ha ha. It’s funny, light-hearted, etc. I do prefer to avoid meat only because kosher meat is expensive, the meat industry is brutal and cruel, and it pollutes the planet. But regardless, this subject matter is irrelevant. The point was how he responded. He replied in a blunt, closed-ended, binary-thinking style.
‘This is how it is. This is the law. Your feelings don’t matter. There’s nothing to discuss.’
Rude. I responded with ‘I have a lot of feelings about this topic. I’d love to discuss,’ hoping to engage in dialogue, see how capable he is of expressing himself, or even to see if he would IM me and offer to discuss privately. Something. Anything. Hoping that if he really is an emissary of a larger group that maybe, I don’t know, he’d behave that way
I was clearly wrong. I messaged him privately to ask if he wanted to have a conversation – meaning I am opening the door, dude, you need to walk through it and save the situation – and he repeated himself, again, rudely. Hard and fast language, limited binary perspective, right or wrong, black or white, and (this part is the most annoying) positions it in terms of he is right, I am wrong, and by wanting to engage, I am the ‘weaker/lesser’ person.
Terrible language. Holy crap. I actually was shocked. Not that someone was mean to me on the internet. Nah. I was shocked that he expects to draw people closer to his community, his people, his cause. You ain’t getting many takers when you talk like that, buddy.
Point is this: If you want to market yourself as a brand ambassador, a person others can look up to, a representative of a greater whole – a whole, by the way, that has a written mandate of compassion to the stranger – you need to change your language. Right now.
Use open-ended language. Offer options in your dialogue. Ask questions instead of making declarations. Consider how your words make you look. Remember that there is absolutely ZERO expectation of privacy on the internet so your stuff is going to come back and bite you.
Screen shots below.
Seriously people. Don’t do this. It’s critical to think before you press enter.
I can tell you truthfully that when my husband found out about this person’s responses, he was 100% willing to walk away, not engage, and forget about connecting with this group of people. He said:
If that’s how he’s willing to behave and communicate, what does that say about the greater community?
It makes me sad because the spouse is right. Regardless of the subject matter, the type of community or group, this kind of communication sucks and makes you look bad. Plus it’s bad for branding, it’s repellent, and it’s very difficult to walk back.
Watch what you say.
