Lessons on Persuasion from Jesus, Shakespeare, Lincoln, and Lady Gaga: a Book Review
With a name like "Language Intelligence: Lessons on Persuasion from Jesus, Shakespeare, Lincoln, and Lady Gaga", a book with a title like that compels one to pick it up and see what the heck the author is talking about. And Joe Romm's new book on how to communicate doesn't disappoint--it's a thoughtful and compelling look at the techniques used by some of history's great communicators to help persuade. Joe Romm is author of the climateprogress.org blog, the most visited climate change blog on the Internet, and the main blog that I use to stay current on climate change and energy news. Romm defines Language Intelligence as "the ability to convince people of something both intellectually and emotionally, at both a conscious and unconscious level." He goes on to say, "If facts were sufficient to persuade people, then experts in science would rule the world. But facts are not, and scientists do not. We filter out all the facts that do not match our views." At the heart of great communication lies great story telling, and Romm give us these tips on how to tell a story people will want to read:
- Write a great headline: Newspaper readers read 56% of the headlines, but only 13% of the stories are at least half-read. Headlines are even more important on-line, since they are what show up on Google searches and tweets. An example of one the most re-tweeted headlines Romm used in 2011: "Mother Nature is Just Getting Warmed Up: June 2011 Heat Records Crushing Cold Records by 13 to 1" (Romm uses a pun and personification to help create an eye-catching headline.)
- Short words are the best words.
- Slogans sell.
- If you don't repeat, you can't compete. Repetition and rhyming help people remember your message.
- The golden rule of speech-making is: "Tell 'em what you're going to tell 'em; tell 'em; then tell 'em what you told 'em."
- Repeated distortions and smears are as effective as repeated truths, so beware of these sorts of attacks.
- If you want to de-bunk a myth, you need to focus on stating the truth, not repeating the myth.
- If you want to be more noticed and remembered, use more figures of speech (metaphors.) Examples of metaphors I've used include comparing our melting Arctic to the attic of a house that is on fire (Earth's attic is on fire: Arctic sea ice bottoms out at a new record low) and comparing the impact of global warming on extreme weather to the impact steroids have on a baseball slugger (Extreme events of 2011: climate change a major factor in some, but not all).
- Create an extended metaphor when you have a big task at hand. Countless books and articles underscore that extended metaphors are at the core of human thinking.
Video 1. National Center for Atmospheric Research scientist Dr. Jerry Meehl uses a metaphor to explain how climate change's impact on extreme weather is similar to how steroids affect a baseball slugger's ability to hit a ball out of the park.
At 183 pages, the book only took me about two hours to read, and I was very glad I did. It was very entertaining and informative, and anyone involved in public communication can learn from this book. I give it my highest rating: four stars out of four. Language Intelligence: Lessons on Persuasion from Jesus, Shakespeare, Lincoln, and Lady Gaga is $9.67 from Amazon.com.
Have a great Thanksgiving Holiday, everyone, and I'll have a new post for you on Friday.
Jeff Masters
Reader Comments
Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 — Blog Index
Anyway, back into the kitchen. Three more pies in the oven, and, in the meantime, I'm rising two of the three kinds of bread that I'll be crumbling for dressing once they're out of the oven. (Corn- , French-, and sourdough bread, along with sausage, apples, cranberries, a few mushrooms, and pecans. Oh, and butter. Lots and lots of butter. Just this once.)
can't get that link - page not found
Actually he was expressing his bafflement that the Beatles were more popular than Jesus. He was amazed by fanaticism of Beatles fandom. He was not being self-aggrandizing, although many Christians (in their own form of fanatacism) chose to misunderstand and misquote him at the time and now this myth has been carried on in perpetuity. I remember the public book/record burnings back then and I still shake my head at the stupidity.
Would like to put a piece of that ice cream pie on top of my mississippi mud.
Warm air begins to take over from west to east in the 8-14 day range, however:
I half expected you to burn a witch by the end of that diatribe. The Dark Ages called. They want their mentality back.
That's not to say you are ignorant. You are definitely not ignorant. An ignorant person can be educated. An ignorant person can actively pursue a course to make themselves more educated. They can go and discover information and facts about what they don't know. And in the end, an ignorant person will no longer be ignorant.
No, you are maliciously willfully ignorant. You and others like you REFUSE to be educated about that which you do not understand, often to the detriment of others. There is no amount of scientific research, or facts, or even reality itself that will convince you otherwise. Your ideology trumps all, facts be damned. It doesn't matter how many experts on the subject agree, you always know better and you are always right. Cognitive dissonance is your bread and butter, and so is insulting every single person who disagrees with you no matter if it's your neighbor or Albert Einstein.
It doesn't matter that a grade school experiment can demonstrate the physics behind the greenhouse effect. It doesn't matter the thousands of scientists over the past 150 years have written reams upon reams of peer reviewed science papers on the subject. It doesn't matter that there are petabytes of observational data backing up researchers claims. It doesn't matter that the same atomic principles that cause the greenhouse effect are also used in everyday manufacturing and other processes. To the willfully ignorant, this is nothing but pointless noise, easily dismissed (or twisted) with a wave of the hand as you are doing.
It's people like you that fought against asbestos being banned. It's people like you that fought against the fact that cigarettes cause cancer. It was people like you that fought against putting scrubbers on smoke stacks to reduce acid rain. It was people like you that fought against banning CFC's which depleted the ozone layer.
And by the end of this century when the world is dealing with more serious consequences of AGW, it will be people like you screaming "Why didn't anyone warn us?!?!?" and looking for anyone but yourself to blame.
Poll: Fox News Viewers Less Informed Than Those Who Read No News
Study: Watching Fox News Actually Makes You Stupid
A new survey of American voters shows that Fox News viewers are significantly more misinformed than consumers of news from other sources.
The Lies That Fox News Viewers Believe (PDF)
...people who...watched Fox News were...more likely to have such misinformation than those who did not watch it
And so on. Please let me know if you need more...Because a well-researched and vigorously-tested scientific theory endorsed nearly unanimously by those whose views on the subject are most and best informed is in no way the same as comparing either ratings among competing cable TV networks or the preferences of America's fickle TV-viewing public.
There was some point about 40+ years ago when some of the Beatles were reported to say we are more popular than Christ.
This as far as I can remember was followed by a large quantity of their records and writings being burned in the USA.
While I don't uphold Fox News, as it is clearly biased, why do you single it out amongst the other major networks which are somehow even worse at times? Why is that? What is your goal?
It's a beautiful day here in Central Alabama, with a temperature of 69 and a light breeze as I write this. It's supposedly only going to get into the mid 50's and down into the mid 20's by Saturday. Seems to hard to believe, but we'll see if it really happens. No severe storms at all so far, which is a blessing for us, since November is our secondary severe weather season here.
Since we're all going to die soon from the curse of the Mayans, AGW, zombie attack, asteroid collision, or just plain old age, tomorrow will be a good day for giving thanks for all I've gotten so far and the pleasures of life while they last. I've met an a lot of really good people here (even including Nea {gasp!}), so I'm also thankful for all of you, Dr. Masters, and Angela for giving us a place to vent, learn, and generaly hang out. Happy Thanksgiving, everyone.
Because that is not a popularity contest. AGW theory is based on solid science and evidence. Almost all climatologists agree with the science, and they are all experts in the field to understand the science.
The average person is not an expert in every area they may have an opinion on, nor do they always act in their best interest. For example, McDonald's food is quite popular but that certainly doesn't mean it's healthy. :)
Ugh. I quoted myself. It makes me twitch because it feels narcissistic to me. ;)
Oh well, easier to connect my continued thought.
What prompted his oft-misquoted statement was that in that year (1965? 66?, I've forgotten which), Beatles albums outsold the bible. If I recall correctly, a reporter brought that up in an interview and Lennon expressed surprise that the Beatles were more popular than Jesus.
And then the madness ensued.
There are more than just FOX being disingenuous.
Actually, it was 1967 (early fall, I believe) just before the release of "Hello, Goodbye". That single was the first new release to be banned by radio stations after John made his comments regarding The Beatles being bigger than Christ. He later walked it back, noting he was just observing that fans elevated The Beatles higher, it seemed, than Christ.
You felt compelled to even comment on that?
A bit over the top for me.
How do I know that any of that is true?
The Mayan calendar was based on an event, not a date. The Mayans predicted (correctly) a lunar eclipse in December 2012, went back in records to see when that particular eclipse happened before, and determined these two occurrences as the beginning and end of a b'ak'tun. They then split the time up between the two. Thus, they did not use a Gregorian date to determined the end of an age.
However, they also predicted events after the coming end of the age, and did not teach or believe that the world would end in December 2012. IOW, you still have to shop for Christmas :)
Nea, when can I expect delivery of a Malibu rum pie?
An Extract from:-
16. eyeofbetsy
"China is building a new mega watt of coal fired electricity generation a week. Already they produce nearly twice the co2 America does."
Quoted!
You do need to add into this, that there are 4 times as many Chinese people as there are in the USA, so from that ratio, the Chinese are only producing half the CO2 per person that the USA is.
Having said that the amount of CO2 pollution going on is so vast that even if the Chinese stopped producing CO2 altogether then it would probably make very little difference to the grand scheme of things in the greenhouse gases movie.
The next big addition to the problem is going to be more and more industrialisation of the third world where laws and rules are not going to take much of a priority.
lol ;)
I think he marveled at the craziness of the world since it seemed like the Beatles were more popular than Jesus. Oh help us! At least they just burned records for that remark.
and your objection is?
are you using a solar oven?? gas or electric??
well all the kids went out and bought new albums after their folks went bonkers and burned... so the Beat-uls made out anyway..
Now Nea, just after I wrote I liked you, you come up with this. :) All the sources you quoted are at least left-leaning, and one is from MSNBC! I'm pretty sure MSNBC is never going to have a favorable word to say about Fox, considering that Fox is cleaning their clock when it comes to ratings. I could provide you with just as many links from right-leaning web sites that purport to show that the major networks and NPR are run by a bunch of commies, and they would be just as misleading.
Fox certainly has its own biases, as do all media outlets. What concerns me is that some people assume the average American is just a sponge, absorbing whatever is thrown at them. I don't know what the percentage is, but most people are capable of dissecting information and discarding the obviously false while doing more research on what might be true. Media outlets from both ends of the political spectrum present valuable information, and it's up to each of us to decide what we believe. I may be naive, but I seem to have more faith than some that most people are really not stupid, and will come to mostly reasonable conclusions. One could certainly argue that a huge amount of time and money was spent to defeat President Obama, yet a majority of people believed what they were being told was wrong and voted him in again. I don't happen to be one of them, but I respect the fact that people really can swim upstream and don't need to be led by people that believe they know "best".
For instance, The dems, during their convention, having to railroad their own delegates to put God back into their official platform after having taken him (or her) out.
Or maybe oil fired , or coal or even firewood .....
"Christianity will go. It will vanish and shrink. I needn't argue about that; I'm right and I'll be proved right. We're more popular than Jesus now; I don't know which will go first—rock 'n' roll or Christianity. Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. It's them twisting it that ruins it for me."
The "more popular than Jesus" thing was a small part of what got Christians upset. John Lennon, while a great musician, was clearly off base when it came to discussing Christianity.
If 97% of blacksmiths say "Don't stand near the forge when I'm shoveling coal in," you stay away. And then you wonder what the hell kind of deal the remaining three percent of blacksmiths have with the undertaker.
Expertise matters. Argumentam ad populum is a fallacy. Arguing on the basis of independently-reproducible data that literally anyone can reconstruct given sufficient expertise is not. The 97% is a signal to those who refuse to educate themselves on the matter, not an argument in and of itself.
idk he can never answer a simple question unless it's from an msnbc study done by sharpton or matthews...
And a wonderful Happy Thanksgiving to our Armed Forces.
Can I come to your house Nea? Lol ...actualy doing the same thing here in Houston ...pies and bread for stuffing ...all made with the love of my own little hands
Did the carbon footprint question ever get answered? ...
no i got a 12 hr ban for asking that question....
Tell all the Truth but tell it slant --
Success in Circuit lies
Too bright for our infirm Delight
The Truth's superb surprise
As Lightning to the Children eased
With explanation kind
The Truth must dazzle gradually
Or every man be blind --
Lmao. Nea, You are the best.
Viewing: 51 - 101
Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 — Blog Index