Feeding My Ignorance

In the last few days I have seen two really good examples in social media of people bringing their own biases to discussions and replying to what they thought was written rather than what was actually written. In both cases it made them look just a bit foolish.

...

What triggered me to comment on this was not so much the act itself - to a certain extent they were simply outstanding examples of some of the cognitive biases that we all exhibit - but which seem to run particularly rampant on social media platforms - perhaps because those platforms tend to magnify anything that strays from the 'norm'. Rather it was the fact that in one case the person didn't get the joke - in the other the person thought it was a joke - but it wasn't.

Communication between two people can be difficult - communication amongst many people in the context of social media is much, much worse. In the one to one situation there are usually some shared contexts that illuminate the "bare words" with nuances suitable for the exchange. This enables the intrinsic deficiencies of language to be somewhat alleviated.

There are still many instances every day where people are "talking past each other"simply down to a misinterpretation. Although in essence this is indeed "simple" to resolve, often the resolution is only achieved by the intervention of a third party who "can see both sides" and can interpret their way through the misunderstandings.

In the domain of social media very little of the "shared context" exisits - and this is exacerbated by the fact that often people express themselves in a way that is "suitable" for understanding by their close friends and acquaintances. In short, they assume a much greater degree of shared understanding than is usually the case. This results not only in misinterpretation - but in a very public misinterpretation - which, of course, can itself be misinterpreted by others.

One person writes something - another "takes umbrage" at what is written expressing at the same time an alternative view - others see this exchange - may assume that the original two participants have "fallen out" - may wade in (often rather heavily) on one side or another - which can be particularly damaging if the second person had read into the first peson's statement something "bad" that was never intended or meant.

Humour is a particularly difficult thing to bring to any interaction on social media. It should be immediately clear why this is the case - humour is very much a matter of "taste"- not least because much of what is humourous is in one way or another "poking fun" at some class of people. "Its just a joke" is a common defence for saying or doing something that someone else finds (one way or another) distasteful.

It is no surprise that there are endless complaints about what a "comedian" has done or said. Perhaps the surprise is that there are not more.

Of course, many of the most successful comedians thrive on the fact that they can play to an audience comprised of people who - fundamentally - share their prejudices. Their jokes are outrageously funny to those whose outlook on life is similar to their own. In context, their words are (probably) harmless although that very much depends on the target of their humour. However, they (almost always) are playing on the fact that "some" people are 'different' and that "some other" people will find that funny.

National differences are an easy target - and I am sure that to a certain extent everyone is prone to making generalisations about the character of particular nationalities. We do this not just for the purpose of making fun but also for the purpose of understanding. If we know that many people belonging to a particular nation behave in a particular way then it becomes easier to deal with that.

As a Scot I am more than well aware of the reputation we have for keeping tight control of our wallets. Its a target for humour - the skinflint jock - even though by far the majority of scots that I know are the most generous people around. Do I get upset if someone pokes fun at me in that sort of way - no - there is no need. Equally they might assume that as a scot I like my drink - a wee dram at the slightest opportunity - and the jokes follow that assumption - despite the fact that I am teetotal and therefore rather burst that particular illusion.

Virtually every joke can be seen as in some way cruel on a particular person or a group of people - in some cases it is brushed off as "banter" - however there is a very thin line separating banter from cruelty. What makes this even more difficult to navigate is that the line is not fixed, but ever moving. I wrote something along these lines in Exploring a Grey Area.

The context, as I said above, is extremely important - and by context I don't just mean the local context - much wider cultural, political and other contexts also impact on whether something said as "a joke" is acceptable or not. One thing that many seem to fail to understand is that in an age when long distance communication is quick and easy something said "in private" is often shared "in public" and therefore in a completely different set of contexts.

There have been loads of high profile instances of comedians saying something that they - and their audience - thought funny and later it comes back to haunt them because - in a wider context - it is rather ill-advised (at best).

Within this post I am not pursuing the rights/wrongs of this - what is concerning me here is that the message can be misunderstood. People will fail to see the joke because their context is so different. Conversely, someone will pick up on something said and perceive it as a joke because - as far as their experience and perspective is concerned - it is not a serious consideration.

In a recent article for Huffington Post Michael Lissack talked about this sort of thing - calling it the Chasm of Dissonance. He explains all this much more clearly than I can (albeit in the context of the current American political situation). I should point out that this post was started before his, although it is being finished after his was published!!

The bottom line - communication with someone else is difficult - sometimes impossible - and unless and until we accept that and put in place ways to bridge that "Chasm" we are doomed to repeatedly fail to understand and be understood. Arresting the natural instinct to jump to a conclusion would make a good start.