Baby Talk

My grandson, Harrison, just celebrated his first birthday, and it has been fascinating to watch him develop, physically and mentally. As a communicator, I am most curious about how he acquires language. Of course, there have been thousands of studies on the subject, so I am not going to make any new discoveries here. Suffice it to say that language is a unique and complex human trait.

Language comes from interaction. According to the Linguistic Society of America, “Children who are never spoken to will not acquire language. And the language must be used for interaction with the child; for example, a child who regularly hears language on the TV or radio but nowhere else will not learn to talk.” I find that fascinating. Another strike against using the TV as babysitter. (Of course, it begs the question: who did they test this on?)

“Baby talk” is a unique form of language that adults use with children (and, sometimes, with animals). It seems to be built into us, and it is thought to be designed to lead children on as they learn the structure and sound of the spoken language – just a little ahead of their own development.

There is no shortage of non-verbal communication with babies, either. Harrison often points to something that he wants – a toy, food, his mother. Whether it is accompanied by a sound or not, the meaning is clear. But it doesn’t stop there. It has become increasingly popular in early childhood education to teach children American sign language, the technique often used by the deaf. Some kids take to this remarkably well. And any fears that using sign language or other non-verbal communication will delay actual spoken language acquisition appear to be unfounded. In fact, encouraging any form of communication is a positive thing in language development for children.

One of the constant worries of any new parent is whether a child is developing “normally.” Here, I have a little experience. As the father of six, I can say that no child is normal – that is to say, typical. With all of those genes and cells and environmental inputs, how could you expect any one child to develop in the same way as another? Language is a particular case in point. I know I’m a grandfather, so I can indulge the luxury of not worrying. I’m just going to enjoy the show!

What in the World Is CSAH 12?

This week, I am going to indulge myself with a little rant. But there is a definite lesson in communication here, so please bear with me.

The other day, I was driving down a local road here in Minnesota and came upon an electronic sign reading, “CSAH 12 REPAVING STARTING MAY 23. EXPECT DELAYS. THANKS FOR YOUR PATIENCE.” Clear enough, right? Except I had no idea what CSAH 12 was! I was driving on Noble Parkway. Was it the road to be repaved? Was it the intersecting street? Another street a block up? And what in the world is a CSAH?

When I got home, I googled CSAH and found out that it is a “County State-Aid Highway.” Doesn’t exactly roll off the tongue. A little more research confirmed that CSAH 12 is, indeed, Noble Parkway. Now, unless I’m mistaken, not everyone travelling past that sign is going to go to the trouble of looking this stuff up. And I would imagine that very few would already know what a CSAH is – or that Noble Parkway is number 12. Not very helpful information on a road sign if you have to decode it several hours later at home.

So what went wrong here? Communication has three basic components, and the perpetrators of this useless message fractured all three:

• The Audience: The folks who programmed the sign were likely county employees. Like any subculture, they have their own arcane jargon. But the audience for this message, the average driver, should not be expected to be familiar with this special language. The message writers misjudged their audience. Or worse, they were just arrogant and expected people to know what they know – or the heck with them. (See my April 24^th blog, “Feeling Left Out?”)
• The Message: Like all road signs, this message was meant to be read and understood quickly. But, if people are trying to figure out the first part of the message, they may easily miss the rest of it. The message is confusing and unclear.
• The Call to Action: What did the authorities want drivers to do as a result of the message? Be prepared for delays on the road which was being repaved. But if they weren’t sure what road was being described, how could they be prepared? Fail.

Thanks for letting me rant. With such a transgression of all the rules of communication, I couldn’t resist at least trying to make something good out of it!

Top 5 Reasons Why Blogs List the Top 5 Reasons

Did you ever wonder why so many blogs and Facebook ads and the like have titles like “Top 5 Things to Take on Vacation,” or “10 Most Important Pasta Cooking Tips”? Well, I did a little thinking – not much, actually! – and came up with the following. See if you agree – and if you have additional items:

1. The most obvious reason is to tease you into clicking on the link. Clicks are one of many metrics that website owners use to measure success and charge advertisers.
2. Once you are on their site, many have ads that you might click on. If they expect you to click on “next” for each of the following items in the list, then you are exposed to that many more ads. Sometimes, the shrewder sites will disguise and ad link as the “Next” button, so you’ll get to an advertiser’s site, even if you had no such intention.
3. These numbered lists do give you some expectation of the time commitment to read the information when you get there.
4. If you actually get some value from the list, you may choose to bookmark the website and come back again in the future. That’s a bit more long-term thinking than trying to trick you into clicking on something!
5. There is no number 5. Really. But I’m open to suggestions! (What would you think if those other lists short-changed you?)

So, when it comes right down to it, these lists – and teases like “When he told her he was unhappy, this is the last thing he was expecting to hear!” – are just trying to get your attention, to divert you from what you may have been intending. As we all know, the clamor to get you to look at a particular site, ad, news story, video, etc. is intense. These techniques, like all the others before them, will be replaced when they stop working by new or more sophisticated approaches. Stay alert so you aren’t taken in!

What Is It About Texting?

I’d like to talk about texting this week. I don’t mean the dangers of texting while driving or the humorous things that auto-correct does to the texts we write. I want to address texting as a communication medium. For it is a unique creature – in many ways unlike talking or calling or emailing or letter writing, etc. Interestingly, its closest communication relative may be the telegraph.

Texting has only been with us for about 25 years, but, to state the obvious, it is ubiquitous. Is it replacing other forms of communication? My millennial daughter and I had a long chat – via text – and I asked her about it. She said, “Talking on the phone is a dying art... I feel like they’re [phone calls] becoming like writing letters.” (See my blog about writing letters!)

So, what is it about texting?

Some of the pros: When you write a text, you have time to think - to compose- rather than thinking on your feet like you have to do on a phone call. You can send the text now, and the recipient can wait for a convenient time to reply. You can share photos and much more than just text now. You can carry on text conversations with multiple people much more easily than setting up a conference call.

But, there are cons: Texting may be prone to more errors than other media. Like email, it is difficult to interpret tone – or to misinterpret it. It takes people out of the present and focuses their attention elsewhere. And need I mention the distraction that texting causes?

As a communication person, I think the definitive thing about texting is that it is an asynchronous form of communication. Essentially, that just means “not live.” Media like live TV and radio, phone calls, and the theatre are all synchronous – they're happening in real time. Letters, email, voicemail, movies – these are all asynchronous. Stored, not immediate. When thought of this way, texting definitely fits that last group.

Interestingly, though, with the evolution of mobile technology, we will see changes to, and eventually the eclipse of texting. Voice, vision and touch inputs and outputs, artificial intelligence, even implants, will change the whole ballgame – and probably very soon. For us boomers, we might take some satisfaction in knowing that our kids’ children may someday say to their parents, “What’s texting?”   

The Case for Clean Language

There was a time when clean language was the norm and swearing was unusual. Boy, how the tables have turned! Nowadays, the words that would have gotten kids’ mouths washed out with soap or given ladies “the vapors” are commonplace in popular media, the workplace, and in our homes. Frankly, I don’t like it.

Now, I’m certainly no prude. I have definitely used profanity more times than I’d care to admit. And I’m not taking a religious or biblical view of it, either. There are many interpretations and controversies lying in wait there. But I do bemoan the effect the decline of language has had on our culture. The English language (and, I’d daresay, all others) has sufficient words available to describe anger, frustration, hyperbole, and so forth without resorting to “coarse language.”  

The great wits like George Bernard Shaw, Winston Churchill, and Oscar Wilde were able to create scathing insults without resorting to unacceptable terminology. Being adept at using the F word as a noun, verb, adjective, and an adverb does not really impress one’s audience with his or her command of the language! And, speaking of “his or her,” there is little differentiation between the sexes in the use of bad language, either.

This decline did not happen overnight, of course. Over the years, the line of acceptable language has moved almost imperceptibly. There were some major leaps, such as George Carlin’s “7 Dirty Words.” But, for most of us, we just heard and said more of the stuff that was formerly forbidden. Location used to matter: we could say certain things in the locker room but not at the dance. Those lines have been erased, as well.

Is there a way to put the genie back into the bottle and clean up our language? It’s a very tall order, but we each have the willpower to clean up our own act if we choose. Why not give it a try? Make an effort for a day, then a week, to avoid swearing. It could become a habit. You might have to become more creative in your use of the language. And you’ll stand out. Even if some may mock you, I’d be pretty sure they’ll secretly admire you.

Feeling Left Out?

Have you been in a conversation where others used jargon or acronyms, but you had no idea what they were talking about? Were you too embarrassed to ask? Did you prefer to remain ignorant? I’ve experienced this from childhood to adulthood, and the feeling is no less pleasant today. Kids, being kids, tend to be more obvious about pointing out an unfortunate peer’s lack of knowledge.

When I was in about 5^th grade, a new term phrase entered my world: “make out.” (To kiss and hug passionately. It may mean more now, but it was relatively tame back then!) At recess one day, I innocently inquired of a classmate about this strange idiom’s meaning. She wasted no time informing the rest of the class of my ignorance in the loudest way possible. I vowed then and there to never be put in that situation again. Of course, there was no internet then, so my research had to be a bit more involved, but I found out what I needed through trusted sources.

Unfortunately, this happens with grownups, too. Esoteric terminology is used by some people the same way those fifth-graders did: to hurt others, or, at least, to feel superior to them. The clique, the in crowd, the private club – these and many more human groupings seem to thrive on the separateness their language creates. This kind of thing can lead to an attitude towards “others” that makes it easier to slip into hate.

Sometimes, speakers may merely be unaware of the listener’s ignorance. After a long time of speaking to others with a similar foundation in their area of expertise, they may forget that there are plenty of folks without that knowledge. Then, jargon becomes a straightforward barrier to communication. If the listener is confident enough to admit his or her ignorance – and the speaker is considerate – then some explanation and definition will probably take place. In group settings, it is beholden on the speaker(s) to make sure the whole audience is on the same page.

So, what is the bottom line?

1.  Don’t tolerate the use of language solely to separate your group from others and prove your superiority. Of course, you sometimes need your own language to share knowledge about a craft like quilting or a hobby like coin collecting. But don’t use it as a bludgeon.
2. If you are communicating with people who may not know some of your terminology, be careful to include definitions or explanations – in a glossary or within the text of your speech or article.
3. Never embarrass someone who is not as fully versed in the jargon as you are. Consider the Golden Rule, and do what you would hope someone else would do for you in a similar situation.

The Death of Journalism? - Part 2

Last week, I talked about the changes forced on the profession of journalism. I focused on the “external” factors of limited time, limited staff, and the 24-hour news cycle.

Now it’s time to take a hard look at the journalists, themselves. When I worked in TV news, as a film and video editor and producer, one of the high expectations placed on journalists was objectivity. I learned, however, that there really is no such thing. No human being can be truly unbiased. When you work in a place – and a profession – where most of your peers hold the same world view, subjectivity becomes invisible. In other words, when everyone wears the same “rose-colored glasses,” opinion and truth can become synonyms.

Don’t get me wrong: a good journalist works to overcome this bias - if he or she is aware of it. The expansion of electronic news sources over the past few decades has not heralded an increase of objectivity. Instead, news outlets representing one political stripe crop up to counteract the biases that they see in other news organizations. Fox News is a classic example, created to offset the liberal views of the “mainstream media.” TV news viewers can pick the news that makes them feel good; to support their own biases, rather than to be informed. Like many conservatives, I don’t consider Fox News “fair and balanced.” Rather, I see and hear news that is presented from a conservative perspective. As Jeff Sorensen says in his Huffpost Detroit blog, “Confirmation bias blinds people to the bias because it supports their point of view.” It’s nice if you want to say “See, I told you!” But that is not helpful if you want to be an informed citizen or carry on a reasoned debate.

At one time, internalized standards like honesty and integrity were among the values for which journalists strove. Of course, some still do. But the temptations and the pressures of time and money make it very difficult. Our culture, having become unmoored from commonly-held Judeo-Christian values, has a difficult time expecting or enforcing those standards. Consequently, journalism, as a calling, is endangered - if it isn’t dead already.