I?ve seen several commentaries and blogs today that attack John Edwards or Dick Cheney on the basis of how they communicate. Generally, the writer doesn?t like it because he or she prefers a different style. For example, lots of Republicans and conservatives are attacking Edwards for his final remarks that told a story about how his dad was learning math at home to get a better job and ?that made me proud.? Too emotional, they say, not substantive. On the other hand, some Dems and libs are attacking Cheney for the reverse problem of being too matter-of-fact and not offering a more personal side of himself.
Here?s my point: people communicate differently. It is silly to attack Edwards seeking an emotional connection with viewers just because you prefer details and philosophical argument. I do too, actually, but plenty of voters do not. You have to communicate the way they prefer, not the way you prefer, and you have to offer different kinds of information (verbal and visual) to maximize your persuasion of a diverse audience.
Of course, I?m thinking a lot about these issues because of my book project, Selling the Dream: Why Advertising is Good Business, which is about 2/3 finished, by the way.
