What if Zig Ziglar didn't really sell pots and pans door to door?
What if Les Brown wasn't really pigeon-holed as 'educable retarded'?
What if Tony Robbins never sat in his apartment listening to Neil Diamond sing 'I am I said'?
Three famous stories from three famous and trusted (mostly) high-level speakers. Stories that are theirs - they happened to them, and all add powerful credibility and emotion to their overall messages.
What if...they were lies? Would we still care about these speakers and their messages? Would we discredit them, and dismiss all they've ever said? Would we feel betrayed?
How much of a lie is a lie? Speakers often 'embellish' their stories. Dialogue is polished for maximum efficiency and effect. Times and places may change. Perhaps monetary amounts are fudged a bit. Where do we draw the line, as speakers, and as audiences? When does a 'little white lie' turn into a big fat honking lie that discredits the speaker, and ultimately breaks 'The Speaker's Trust'?
---
Last week at this time, Toastmasters was holding its annual 'World Championship of Public Speaking'. Speakers from around the world doing there best to reach the audience with touching stories that created laughter and tears. Most were likely first-person accounts of events in their lives - those are typically the most effective in this particular contest.
Nowhere in the rule book for this contest, however, does it mention the stories have to be TRUE. From reports I've heard over the years, there are a few that succeed in advancing, even winning the whole contest, with patently FALSE stories, told as if they were the truth.
2010 Champion David Henderson admitted just hours after the contest that his heart-wrenching first-person account of his childhood friend dying from Sickle Cell Anemia, a speech where he described specific conversations and interactions that had the audience entranced and emotionally invested, was, as he put it, 'Mythologized'. She never existed. The events never happened. You can find this interview by clicking HERE - it starts about halfway through, after the quiz game. (if I had listened to this 3 years ago - this post would have been written 3 years ago...)
He defends it as a way to bring attention to Sickle Cell Anemia. He succeeded at this, to be sure. He also won the entire contest, within the rules. For me, however, he also betrayed 'The Speaker's Trust'.
If you hear a first-person, told as truth story that puts you through an emotional ringer as this speech did, and then find out it's nothing more than a 'Tall Tale' created to make a point, how does that make you feel? Is there no other way to spread awareness? Are there no REAL stories that would work just as well?
Again - David did nothing 'wrong' within the parameters of the contest. It was a fantastic speech. In the context of the event, I thought he was the clear winner. But, what if he had revealed at the close of his speech that his friend never existed? Would the impact been as strong? Would the judges have ruled the same way?
---
But when speakers outright manipulate an audience by telling stories as if they really happened to them, particularly emotional tales that will cause the audience to sympathize with the speaker when no sympathy is warranted, I believe it's betrayal. Why should I ever care about anything you say again?
What can we really do about 'The Speaker's Trust'? In the Toastmasters contest, maybe not much. Tough to verify the truth of that many speeches in such a short period of time. For professional speakers like Zig, Les, & Tony, the truth often comes out, and the audience has to decide. (I'm not, by the way, challenging these particular speakers).
'The Speaker's Trust' is a concept we have to honor within ourselves. To be faithful to our audiences, and be willing to draw the line at outright falsehoods. I don't care how good it sounds - if it isn't accurate, you're doing a disservice to your audience, and in the long run, to yourself.
Rich, as you know I have always said don't let facts get in the way of a good story, your question hits home. There's a difference between embellishment and falsehood. I guess my line is drawn at the emotional point. If a speaker embellishes to drive home a factual point...to appeal to the intellect, to the head-I can deal with that. But if it is done to pluck heartstrings-to appeal to the heart-I think that is the line where once crossed then trust is lost. I think ginning up a story solely to score emotional points is as dishonest as using someone else's material and passing it off as your own.
ReplyDeleteIt is a fine line to walk, isn't it? There's a real difference between making up wisdom your mother drilled into your head, and making up the fact she came up with this wisdom while dying of ovarian cancer...
DeleteI've seen that at an area contest here in D26, a speech about a son dying in the war in Iraq, that had us all crying. When the speaker admitted it was all fabricated in order to win the speech contest, the judges were out of the room. The audience felt betrayed. You made a fool out of us, speaker. We will never listen to you the same way again. Some of us will never listen to you again, period.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you, Rich.
A visceral reaction that I think many would share, Joan. Is a trophy worth our integrity? I think not.
DeleteThat speech was FAKE?? I loved that speech so much. I thought it was amazing, and now I just feel emotionally manipulated. I'm all about helping a worthy cause and bringing attention to a cause, but there are ethics. I understand that telling a good yarn - you need to simplify, use dialogue and even maybe combine 2 people into one...but making it up completely crosses a huge line.
ReplyDeleteI couldn't believe it myself, Michelle. I'd heard this over the years, but couldn't find the interview til last week. Disappointing, to say the least.
DeleteRich, I totally concur. When I listen to motivational speakers, their personal anecdotes are expected to be authentic. I would be disappointed if I learned they were merely conjured for shock value. When I speak at high schools and colleges, I derive my inspiration to motivate from my own genuine background. I would feel like I was cheating my audience if I did otherwise.
ReplyDeleteThanks for writing this post!
Here is a great quote that connects to your post.
"Three things cannot be long hidden: the sun, the moon, and the truth."
Buddha
Thanks for checking in Uriah - glad to hear you're being genuine with your audiences. Love the quote!
DeleteUnfortunately, saying whatever it takes to win a customer, a company or even a country as in election speeches have become so commonplace that it has become the new "reality" in our society.
ReplyDeleteWe've been going down this path for a longtime. There's a big difference between a President telling us, "We have nothing to fear but fear itself." and one saying "I did not have sex with that woman." or "I am saying when the President does it it isn't against the law."
It seems credibility, integrity, and honesty may only be found in speech contests anymore; kind of like going to the zoo to see endangered species.
I should amend that first paragraph to say it has become the new "reality" to some in our society. Hopefully they are not the majority.
ReplyDeleteWell said, Terry. Integrity seems to be a premium item these days.
DeleteThanks Rich for bringing up a very important topic. Beyond the speech itself, it would also leave me mistrusting the person in general and not want to do business with that person... I think of integrity like a building/structural soundness. When there is an integrity problem in one area, it is likely to be in other areas as well and all is likely to come tumbling down at some point!
ReplyDeleteAll fair questions!
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDelete