We’ve all had a know-it-all or two in our lives at some point. You know the type who can speak endlessly on the most esoteric of subjects with the clear intention of making those listening feel smaller and smaller while the know-it-all appears bigger and bigger. Generally speaking, we don’t like these people.
Personally, I prefer those who readily admit that they know a little bit about a lot of stuff. These folks are admired by people like me, as I know virtually nothing about a lot of stuff, a little bit about some things, and a whole lot about not very much. I readily admit to being ignorant about everything from how to change a flat and how to jumpstart an engine to anything at all to do with cryptocurrency and bitcoin. Don’t try to inform me as I am simply not interested.
On the other hand, none of us like to be treated like we’re stupid, even if we are unapologetically ignorant about some things. But play that know-it-all card, and most of us will start looking for the corner of the rug on which you stand.
To be honest, it’s been a while since anyone has done that to me personally, but the “we think you’re stupid” messages from unknown and uninvited sources arrive daily in my email. Now before labeling me as old-fashioned, understand that I consider my preferred communication channels and priorities to be retro.
Here’s a sample of what I’ve received in just the last few days. There’s the blast email from a political candidate titled “Personally reaching out.” That is neither personal nor reaching out unless I consider reaching out to take some of my money personal. Then there was the “I don’t take your support lightly” email from a candidate whose name I had to Google to find out who he was.
I did get a thank you email from an organization telling me how my money is being spent to help meet their objectives, which is quite amazing since I haven’t donated to this group since the Obama administration. But it was at least sweeter than the two “abandoning hope” emails from PACs trying to guilt-trip me into sending them money.
Of course, this is all wedged in between the basic stuff that isn’t fear-mongering for a clear political purpose until the email is opened and one finds that it is. “$500/month Social Security cuts???” Well, that’s asking for money for a PAC.
Now I don’t unsubscribe to some of this stuff simply because I want to see what they’re doing and what’s happening in this brave new world. It seems both major parties, their candidates, and the organizations adjacent to them think that this is good messaging wrapped around effective fundraising. If so, it is no wonder that both parties are viewed unfavorably by the majority of folks in this country. Different folks in those majorities to be sure, but a whole chunk in the middle don’t like either one. Many of those folks seem to be checking out, and it’s becoming increasingly difficult to blame them for doing so.
The better informed we are, the more likely we are to get motivated, interested, and engaged. The more we know and understand, the better we can see how things do affect us even if we think we are isolated. (There’s a whole bunch of folks in this group following the 2024 election.)
It has occurred to me that a particular piece of political jargon hasn’t sat well with me for quite some time. Just as I detest the word “parenting” and insist on calling it “childrearing” to keep the emphasis where it belongs, I am beginning to feel the same way about that word “messaging” that gets bandied about these days.
Now I don’t know everything, but I’ve been in the room with some folks who know more than I do on this particular topic. “Messaging” is spoken of openly as something that both parties need to get better at doing. A common criticism of many politicians, including the current president, is failing to stay “on message.”
But effective messaging isn’t necessarily about providing better and more complete information. It’s about influencing voter behavior, particularly those considered to be what is commonly referred to as “low information” voters.
We all know who that is, don’t we? And we know who the know-it-all professionals think that is, don’t we? And we all know when someone is yanking our chain, don’t we?
Or do we?
