The Power of Nuance in Crafting Your Message
At Red Sangria, we have introduced our philosophy and approach to strategic communications, focused across a range of issues that are in a period of flux. We presented our “Pendulum Perspective”, and explored the importance of understanding an opposing view, to be able to craft a powerful and compelling message.
We continue the conversation today, by bringing in to focus the idea of nuance. An obvious but currently underappreciated element of the art of communication, engagement and connection.
The Nuance of Applying Nuance
Nuance may be present in a message, position or point of view, or it may be brought into any of these by the receiver of a communication, through research, thoughtful consideration or intention. Attributing nuance to or recognizing nuance in an opposing perspective can be challenging, but it is a skill.
To appreciate nuance, it’s interesting to observe that even science – probably the best attempt by humanity to be objective – is actually riddled with subjectivity and judgment. Science involves imperfect inquiry, sometimes large margins of error and the core challenge of having the scientist crafting a query or designing an experiment, by definition introducing bias and influencing outcomes.
The effective interpretation – and articulation – of scientific inquiry and science-based findings can demand as much appreciation for nuance as the most “subjective”, intangible ideas.
Rethinking the Idea of an “Argument”
Let us next consider an important and interesting contrast in the way we think about discussions, debates and “argument” today, versus what might have happened in the distant past.
We do this to propose that nuance is an indispensable element of all forms of communication, including debate and argument.
In terms of the notion of “argument”, it should be the norm, and not the exception for us to:
Hold and express differing views, even opposing perspectives
Share these with respect, and have them received with respect
Enrich our views and the views of others through this process of candid communication and thoughtful argument
The ability to get to this caliber and quality of argument demands an appreciation of and an ability to navigate nuance.
Today, the word “argument” connotes controversy, contention, dogmatism, hardened positions and the desire to be right, or to “win” at the expense of the countering party. Argument today involves holding fast in the face of science, verifiable facts and thoughtfully constructed framing. Disagreement expressed through argument often leads to aggression and other dangerous consequences.
In classical terms, and in the days where debate was a means of growth and learning, the notion of an “argument” had a very different texture and evoked thoughtful consideration rooted in open-mindedness. In this context, an argument is a complex process that has a structure rooted in reasoning, logic, evidence and a desire to persuade and engage through informed debate. Passion and emotion legitimately have their place, adding humanity to the evolution of important issues. There is no suggestion to be completely dispassionate.
The proposal is rather to ensure that debates are thoughtful, open and well-supported, rooted in a more classical form of debate and “argument”. This includes some foundation of science, analysis, verifiable fact or objectivity.
All this requires the appreciation of nuance as a practical technique of strategic communications.
Science and the Swing of the Pendulum
We paraphrase cosmologist and physicist Dr. Brian Cox, who has commented (in reference to climate) that the nature of scientific statements is perhaps misunderstood, in that such statements flow from measurements and modeling, which he describes as “the best you can do.” ‘Science”, he says, “is always preliminary” and predictions that arise from scientific inquiry come with large margins of error. Science is “never right” and is the only human system that accepts its own fallibility.
Science involves conceiving and executing experiments that lead to findings and “best estimates” that can sometimes be interpreted – or mis-represented – as final, proven and factual. Hypotheses are at the heart of the scientific method, and thinkers like Thomas Kuhn have pointed out that the development of a hypothesis and the design of an experiment are, by definition, influenced by the perspective of the lead scientist. A notion recognized in quantum physics, through the conclusion that the observer influences what is being observed.
The point? That even what is often perceived as the most robust and objective of disciplines demands nuance. It requires an informed understanding of subtle differences, minute calibrations and incremental refinements, in order to best communicate its discoveries and conclusions.
Nuance as the Balancing Element
In this article, we explored:
The idea of a nuanced view
The imperative to return to a classical definition and application of the art of “argument”
The reality that science and its modes of inquiry are less “objective” than may be widely perceived
Despite these realities, or perhaps because of their interplay, the process of crafting a powerful and compelling message and communications strategy is inherently complex and is generally up-levelled when enriched through a nuanced perspective.
At Red Sangria, we take care to ensure that we have – or acquire – the technical understanding, the opposing perspective and the expertise to discern and leverage nuance in framing and delivering world-class communications strategies across our practice areas.
Nuance is a critical element in attaining balance in the sometimes wide swings of the Pendulum. We thought this “obvious” point might be worth bringing back into focus, at a time when language and communication too often devolve into blunt instruments of manipulation, instead of artful tools that promote respectful exchanges even when opinions are in direct opposition.
Red Sangria: Human Powered. Every time.
